ann arbor is overrated. » Blog Archive » The World’s Oldest Profession Started Here Too

The World’s Oldest Profession Started Here Too

All right, we know Ann Arbor likes to take credit for everything from Iggy Pop to the Peace Corps. But this is getting ridiculous. “Our school is popular for many things: athletics, academics, Zingerman�s � and now, as it seems, a popular, tried and true sexual act,” writes Daily columnist Rebecca Ramsey. Although, as far as we know, her phrase “Michigan hookup” never appeared in the thousand-odd pages of the Starr Report, Ramsey would have us believe that our erstwhile president and his intern were engaging in an act that originated in A2, part of the “oral tradition” of this university, as she describes it. And we’re letting Ypsi hog the spotlight with a tower?

90 Responses to “The World’s Oldest Profession Started Here Too”

Not to change the subject, but is the U-M really popular for Zingerman’s? I’d never heard of it until I came here. But I’m not always up on the cool things the kids are talking about.
posted by Nick on January 29th, 2004 at 8:09 am
Weirdly, Nick, some people outside of MI have heard of Zingerman’s. I mean, I hadn’t, but a few years ago when I was flying somewhere on American Airlines(not even Northwest, which would have been less surprising), it was featured in the in-flight magazine. (The article was specifically about ordering food from them; it didn’t advocate actually going to Ann Arbor). Zing’s apparently does a brisk mail or phone order business. Of course, since UM pumps out 8,000 graduates each year who scatter to the far ends of the country, I guess it isn’t *that* surprising that word would get out in the 20 (?) years they’ve existed…
posted by Anna on January 29th, 2004 at 8:43 am
I am puzzled. It seems from this column that female undrgrads oftne give oral sex, but there is nothing about getting oral sex in return. Is that the way it works nowadays?
posted by Lucky Jackson on January 29th, 2004 at 10:28 am
Zingerman’s gets a surprising amount of notice in the national press, actually — cover story in Inc. magazine last January, pieces in the Atlantic and Esquire, and regular mentions in the New York Times food section, the most recent about two weeks ago (cream cheese). Z’s didn’t make Saveur’s top 100 this year, however — though Monahan’s Seafood in Kerrytown did.
posted by Sam on January 29th, 2004 at 10:31 am
God, I just read that story in the Daily. You’d think some morning one of the housemates would talk to her about her grammar. I thought the AA News was the most illiterate newspaper I’ve ever read, but the Daily is giving it a run. Do you suppose she’s really known as “man’s best friend”?

My favorite AA News picture caption, under a photo of a person on a bicycle: “Always where a helmut.”
posted by Sam on January 29th, 2004 at 10:46 am
I still can’t get over that column. If female undergrads perform oral sex and get nothing in return, no wonder they consider the “Michigan Hookup” to be a chore. Let me tell you, back in the Generation X days, that wouldn’t ahve been tolerated. (Am I the only one who thinks this is strange?)
posted by Lucky Jackson on January 29th, 2004 at 11:06 am
No, I follow you completely Lucky.
posted by petunia on January 29th, 2004 at 11:21 am
Ms Ramsey’s parents must be bursting with pride…
posted by Boris on January 29th, 2004 at 11:29 am
….and Anna wondered why I put zero stock in what some college kid writes in a student newspaper.

I just wrote a check for our State liquor taxes, and there is a portion that goes directly to education….couldn’t be more proud to see my tax dollars at work like this. Sweet.
posted by todd on January 29th, 2004 at 12:23 pm
Hey, you are now preaching to the choir.

Education includes the elementary schools and high schools in Michigan. A large proportion of the in-state UM students arrive unprepared. As someone who taught in the writing program at UM, it’s hard to know what to do with that; students probably should know noun/verb agreement and “your” versus “you’re” by the time they get to college. It’s pretty hard to teach them everything they should have learned in elementary school in a single college semester.
posted by Anna on January 29th, 2004 at 12:42 pm
I know everyone has been showing admirable restraint, but somebody has to say it, so I guess I will: This article shows that Ann Arbor really does suck.
posted by Lucky Jackson on January 29th, 2004 at 1:27 pm
OH MY GOD - I LOVE THIS!!!!! I moved here from Chicago in September and people actually told me before I came that Ann Arbor is a better town than Chicago - in what fucking universe? I am so glad that there are people out there that share my pessimistic view of Ann Arbor, and believe that the best thing to do in Ann Arbor is to get the hell out of it. Sean
posted by Sean Duffy on January 29th, 2004 at 1:39 pm
Well, Sean, the debate on the subject is surprisingly lively on this site, but in general, yes, you’re among friends.
posted by Nick on January 29th, 2004 at 1:52 pm
Sean, you make an excellent point. Ann Arbor is a better town than Chicago. Chicago, on the other hand, is far and away a superior city. Keep the distinction in mind and you’ll do just fine around here. (By which I mean the town, not the site. Around the site, you’ll fit in best if you make specious comparisons of Ann Arbor to, say, Paris.)

(Sorry. The Apologist is in a bad mood this afternoon…)
posted by Murph on January 29th, 2004 at 4:08 pm
Chicago is a toddlin’ town, and it’s my kind of town. Doesn’t get much better than that.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on January 29th, 2004 at 4:21 pm
Chicagoan until last year myself. Aside from Minneapolis, Chicago may be the only midwestern city that *doesn’t* have a strong “we suck” culture. That’s one of my nagging reservations about AAIO. It’s so … Toledo.
posted by Sam on January 29th, 2004 at 4:29 pm
Come on, Murph, Paris? Everyone over here at Zingerman’s knows that AA is a far better place than Paris.
posted by Nick on January 29th, 2004 at 4:38 pm
Well, Rebecca Ramsey has certainly contributed to the “we suck” culture. (Lucky Jackson - I actually didn’t think of that. It wasn’t restraint.)

The Georgetown sex columnist isn’t even allowed to write about blow jobs, but she does get to lift stuff from iVillage.com and threaten a hotel that charges $7 for a grapefruit with a bad review in the Washington Post.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on January 29th, 2004 at 4:39 pm
Wow, Murph, you really are in an uncharacteristically bad mood this afternoon. However, I sort of like angry Murph. It makes you witty.

It sounds sort of like you’re arguing, “Okay, we aren’t near a city. Yeah, we aren’t near mountains or ocean. So, to argue that being near cities and mountains and oceans is better than being in Ann Arbor isn’t fair. Ann Arbor doesn’t have those things. For what it is, Ann Arbor’s a good place to live.”

I can’t help but wonder if that’s sort of like the “California. Nice state. Long Commute” argument.
posted by Anna on January 29th, 2004 at 4:45 pm
The Michigan Daily article is helping to promote the “we suck” atmosphere in Ann Arbor. BTW,
when did the word “suck” become so prevalent in terms of describing something undesirable? For a long time, I never used the word, since it really is insulting to people who perform oral sex, creates a general sex-negative atmosphere, etc. In the last several years, however, I have found myself falling into the habit of using it. Any ideas why the word “suck” has made such a comeback.
posted by Lucky Jackson on January 29th, 2004 at 4:48 pm
To cop a phrase, Rebecca, “you ignorant slut.” Though I don’t doubt that the coffee klatch impelled her to write such a risque column, I guess I’m just amazed that anyone could think that the one-and-a-half hook-up was news. Cum-gargling Co-Eds? Film at 11.
But wait- it’s got a Michigan name! That makes it clever, right?
Well, except that the act’s not new, and that the name has got nothing to do with the act. I mean, “meeting Ms. Michigan” is a classic synonym for male masturbation. But a Michigan hook-up sounds more like a five-fingered discount than glans glazing. Or maybe hooking up with someone because it’s cold and you’re planning on leaving anyway. “Yeah, she had a wonkeye, but it was totally a Michigan hook-up. I just got into Columbia, so I’ll never have to see her again.”
Or maybe one that’s overrated? “Yeah, she looked hot, but it was a total Michigan hook-up. Her overbite was scrapin’!”
As for you, Lucky, she said that it should be reciprocated. But apparently that doesn’t happen enough for a clever name. So hey, maybe you should give her a call. Even if you only go out once, it sounds like she feels obligated to serve you with a smile.
js
posted by js on January 29th, 2004 at 4:56 pm
JS, you write for the “Current” with that pen?
posted by Nick on January 29th, 2004 at 5:08 pm
Heh. My editor even cuts out “crap.” Let alone if I get on a jag about pig-fuckers.
js
posted by js on January 29th, 2004 at 5:12 pm
Or maybe hooking up with someone because it’s cold and you’re planning on leaving anyway.

Heh.

It’s just so…non-region-specific. I mean, what’s next? The Daily dubs water “Michigan fluid necessary to sustain life on Earth”?
posted by ann arbor is overrated on January 29th, 2004 at 5:12 pm
No need to get too worked up about Ms Ramsey’s latest travesty. It’s just typically sub-par writing from a not-too-talented undergrad girl who has seen far too many reruns of Sex in the City and fancies herself far more worldly than she really is. Nothing out of the ordinary. She’ll continue to bob along from “Michigan hookup” to “Michigan hookup” until she eventually settles down, has a family, buys a second SUV, and rolls into Annarbour on Saturday game days to take the kids to Stucchi’s and buy sweatshop sweatshirts with bold maize and blue patterns, thus contributing to the local economy and helping us all get one step closer to becoming a “cool city.”

What *I* want to know is, what happened to Ms Strayer — the poor Daily columnist whose ears are no doubt still bleeding from hearing the horrific epithet of “Oriental” uttered at one of the finer jazz clubs on the UP?
posted by Boris on January 29th, 2004 at 6:45 pm
For a long time, I never used the word, since it really is insulting to people who perform oral sex, creates a general sex-negative atmosphere, etc.

Well, perhaps it really would be if “it sucks” referred to fellatio, which is questionable. (Other plausible associations would include “suck eggs,” “suck wind,” suckling, and the older British schoolboy usage of “sucks,” e.g., “sucks to you”.) I’m not arguing that the two aren’t widely associated, but “really is insulting” is too strong a claim.

That said, I haven’t spent much time researching this, and it’s notoriously hard to determine the origins of taboo terms (which would include this one if it were, in fact, originally devised as a shortened form of “sucks dick” or some similar construction) in the first place.
posted by Shmuel on January 30th, 2004 at 1:10 am
Sucks is used as a negative particible in The Pearl, a work of Victorian “erotica”. So it goes back at least to the 1880s.
js
posted by js on January 30th, 2004 at 8:47 am
This article is NOT proof that Ann Arbor sucks. There is a bright side. It’s a great example of uninhibited free speech. Think most college newspapers would allow this article to be published?
posted by petunia on January 30th, 2004 at 9:50 am
To answer your question Petunia: no. But not because of the subject matter.
posted by Sam on January 30th, 2004 at 10:22 am
No, most newspapers have copy editors who would ream her about her pretentious speech patterns (misusing “shall”), inability to keep verb tenses consistent, extra incoherent verbiage (her sentence about the risks of oral sex vs. intercourse), and the difference between “your” and “you’re.”
As far as the content goes, it’s more mild-mannered and retrogressive than you’d think. She’s basically ignorant of any history of gender or sexual relations prior to 1984 (”When Harry Met Sally”, which is featured in another of her columns), and favors the madonna/whore distinction. (You’ve gotta get boys, and to please them, they need sex. But if you have sex and enjoy it, you’re a slut. So you’ve gotta just go down on them casually, so that they’ll like you. And remember, if you haven’t spoken up by the time the cock goes in your mouth, you’ve got no right to decide where you want the come to go). It’s Phyllis Schlaffly doing Candace Bushnell.
Becky needs to read Em & Lo.
js
posted by js on January 30th, 2004 at 10:25 am
what Boris said!
posted by Dan on January 30th, 2004 at 12:38 pm
Has anyone checked out the daily today? Did they get hacked or something? Or is there some early April fool’s day tradition that I’m forgetting about? “Three ’snobs’ slain outside Rick’s”? What will those crazy kids think of next?
posted by Anna on January 30th, 2004 at 1:21 pm
It’s probably the Seniors issue, where the fuck with the paper and think that they’re the Onion.
js
posted by js on January 30th, 2004 at 1:48 pm
Yeah, that’s what it was. The Onion they’re not. Maybe Ramsey’s column was meant for this issue.
posted by Anna on January 30th, 2004 at 2:00 pm
Do you guys really think I should take her out. What is the line at Zingerman’s is too long.
posted by Lucky Jackson on January 30th, 2004 at 4:33 pm
Am I the only one who doesn’t recognize “particible” as a word? Dangling or otherwise, I could’ve sworn there wasn’t a b in the word. Maybe it’s time to have my berscribtion checked.
posted by maestro48103 on January 30th, 2004 at 8:40 pm
Oobs. My pad. Not “berscribtion,” put rather “brescribtion,” blease.

Anna — I spent a lovely year living in Mount Lebanon, and I’d go back to Pbgh in a heartbeat, if there were a job for a choral conductor at Pitt, Duquesne, or CMU.
posted by maestro48103 on January 30th, 2004 at 9:02 pm
What Sam said. And this isn’t risque. Just crass.
posted by Laura on January 31st, 2004 at 12:32 am
Well, based on the underwhelming response from AAIO’ers, I guess you cats can’t make it to Toronto. Some of our staff is going anyways…don’t blame me if you’re bored that weekend.

We are planning a trip to Toledo this summer so we can have a nice day at the Art Museum….we will follow this up with a night of Mudhens baseball. I don’t particularly care for the sport, but the Mudhen experience can only be described as glorious. I’ll post here when the date comes ’round.

….hey, at least I *tried* to get you all out of the house.
posted by todd on January 31st, 2004 at 9:59 am
Yes, maestro, it is participle. It was my bad. I’m glad you got two comments out of it, however. Perhaps I should misspell something else to make your little hands go all a twitter.
js
posted by js on January 31st, 2004 at 10:23 am
Todd, I was glad for the invitation. I’d love to go on one of these jaunts. My constraint is that I have to arrange some concurrent plans for my daughter.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on January 31st, 2004 at 10:53 am
don’t go bothering yourself on my little hands’ account, js. they twitter for a living just fine without any stimulae from you. but thanks for the offer … and the opportunity to make yet another gratuitous comment.
posted by maestro48103 on February 2nd, 2004 at 11:30 pm
I read this site often but never post. For the most part, a lot of people have sound and productive things to say, and I often agree. What I don’t understand is the amount time you all spend hammering the Daily. We should remember that most of the Daily’s writers are between 18-21, “kids” who are just starting to feel their way around the greater world around them. So, you’re going to get writers trying to shock, some poor grammar, underdeveloped arguments, et cetera.
When I think about some of the things I did and said when I was twenty, I shudder.

Seems to me like most (or at least a whole lot) of the people who post here are in their mid to late twenties. I, for one, find it embarrassing to spend so much time ripping 19-year-olds as if they were William Safire.
posted by John Honkala on February 3rd, 2004 at 3:51 am
You and Todd, John.

I guess they’re an easy target, so in a sense you’re right.

The daily really didn’t used to be as bad as it is now, seriously, so I think Michigan students are capable of better… I think the editor really sets the tone in terms of what is/isn’t news, what is/isn’t funny, and what kinds of errors are acceptable. I know that when my friend wrote for the Daily, she was awfully careful about checking grammar and punctuation, because there was hell to pay if she submitted something overly sloppy — and it was taken for granted that the article would be well-written beyond just the mechanics. Incidentally, I knew the editor in high school, and he was very scholarly and intelligent, even at 15. He and the editors right before and after him helped set the tone around there, so people didn’t get totally out of control. And he had to make some very controversial and difficult decisions, for example, whether or not to accept a full-page holocaust-never-happened advertisement, forcing him to make a decision about his role as a jewish man versus his role as member of the press. I respected him for it, and I think a lot of other people did, too, even if they didn’t agree with the outcome.

Not all college kids are really kids.
posted by Anna on February 3rd, 2004 at 10:23 am
It’s totally on the editors to shithammer kids who fuck grammar. Having worked for college newspapers, I was always grateful to get an editor who knows their shit, because my work came better. And that’s the point. Unfortunately, it takes someone who is a bit of a dictator to really enforce that, and they tend to not let good (or self-critical) news stories develop. Trade-off, I guess.
js
posted by js on February 3rd, 2004 at 10:28 am
Js, I hear what you are saying and it makes sense. I commented from a different angle. I was not judging the content of the article…I was just reacting to the early blogger who said that the article was proof that A2 sucks. I don’t think so. I felt, in a simple way, the article reflected a level of free speech that should be respected.

While we’re at it…I don’t think that there are rules of engagement for free speech. I think that it’s a good idea to be open to all speech, even if it’s spelled wrong, poorly organized, or delivered by a fool. There might be something there, a grain of truth.
posted by petunia on February 3rd, 2004 at 1:38 pm
Well, I feel that while everyone should be open to free speech on all fronts, Petunia, calling out idiots is the responsibility of every thinking person in the audience.
js
posted by js on February 3rd, 2004 at 3:43 pm
It’d really help a lot if they had copy editors. Again, we’re talking about college students who work at the paper essentially for free. It’s not like the Daily’s a full-time job — writers are also attending classes.

I agree with Petunia. Good grammar, while being highly important, is not the stick by which we should measure ideas. It pains me to admit that sometimes, because I’d prefer everyone wanted to write well.
posted by John Honkala on February 3rd, 2004 at 7:10 pm
I’m not sure they could find good copy editors from within the staff. One of the associate editors used the word “obsolecent” instead of “obsolete” in his column today (not to mention the smaller problems, of which there were many). Good ideas can be obscured by improper grammar, incorrect word choices, downright confabulated words, etc. Some of what’s in the daily is so poorly written that it’s difficult to understand what the author intends to say.
posted by Anna on February 3rd, 2004 at 7:38 pm
I don’t know about everyone else, but I rip on the Daily because it’s one of only two main papers in town. It’s got to have some power locally, with its restaurant reviews and business coverage.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on February 3rd, 2004 at 7:39 pm
I do it because I taught in the stupid UM writing program for too long. Didn’t those damn kids learn anything? I’m so finding a new line of work.
posted by Anna on February 3rd, 2004 at 7:59 pm
I’ll let the cat out of the bag, then. I wrote for the Daily until last August. For that last year, I was an Associate Editorial Page Editor and columnist. I was considerably older than everybody else there, so I sort of had an advantage in some areas I guess.

I used to get so annoyed when editors would fuck with my grammar–breaking paragraphs at the wrong place and whatnot. I also tried to numerous times to encourage the Editors in Chief to convene a style board, to place AP Guides around the joint, and to encourage better writing. It never seemed like they cared that much.

Still, people like Aubrey Henretty and Zac Peskowitz were just as adamant as I was that good grammar was important. I think if you look at their pages you’ll find that their grammar holds up. The thing is, when you’ve got different people editing pages every night it’s difficult to keep things in line.

I can only speak for the edit page, of course. News, that was a whole different ball game.
posted by John Honkala on February 3rd, 2004 at 11:08 pm
Anna,
I agree that poor grammar is unfortunate. Clarity is the goal, always.

However, if you’re gonna nitpick, I could point out that you didn’t capitalize “Daily” in your last post or that “confabulate” generally means “to chat,” not “make up” as you wrote. We could argue the latter point, of course, but ultimately I’d just tell you not to use an esoteric word like that.

Again, we’re talking about college kids. If you really taught classes at UM, shame on you for being so damn cynical. Grammar’s not the most important thing in this world.
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 5:49 am
Forgot to sign that last post. Whoops.
posted by John Honkala on February 4th, 2004 at 6:08 am
John, I write 40-50 pages a week, and I think you will find that, in my carefully-edited published work, my capitalization is impeccable. By the way, I think you will also find that �confabulate� means to make things up, but hey, if a an editor told me to remove it, I have lots of other words at my fingertips. Even my most hastily dashed-off comments contain better grammar and punctuation than many Daily articles. Anna.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 6:57 am
John, I just noticed your last line.

Grammar, of course, isn’t the most important thing on earth, but it’s important if one is a writer. Is mine perfect? Heck no � of course I make mistakes. I have bad habits, like everyone else (my love of semi-colons, for one, and my love of starting sentences with �But�). But I am very careful when I write for publication. To the extent that students on the Daily staff have aspirations of becoming journalists (and many do, though fewer, it seems, than previously), they need to learn how to write. Passable grammar isn�t a sufficient condition for good writing, but it�s necessary.

Heck, to the extent that they want to do anything that educated people do for work, grammar matters. Do you honestly think people in the real world don’t notice? They do. Like it or not, people make all kinds of assumptions about others based on their written and spoken speech; it is one of the few markers of socio-economic status and educational attainment in this society. I am not saying that that’s right — that’s just the way it is. That�s why when you hear someone from the inner city, you know it; they make characteristic grammatical errors that are easily identifiable, even if you can�t put your finger on what sounds different. The same sorts of markers exist for people with really excellent educations, and educations that are just so-so.

Take a look at Princeton�s paper, or Harvard�s, or Yale�s — those students aren’t much smarter than the more intelligent UM students, but they know how to write. They know it’s important, and they are the ones who will get, and keep, the jobs they want.

Even with the best ideas in the world, Bush would still sound like a moron. That’s a huge part of his problem (well, he has lots of problems, but let’s not go there). Whether you want it to or not, “sounding” educated makes a huge difference in the way people view you and your ideas.

Anna
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 7:25 am
Anna,

First off, I sincerely give you *props* (God, that’s embarrassing) for the phrasial-adjective hyphen in your last post. A big sticking point of mine. I don’t doubt that you can punctuate. My point was that grammar’s not the end all be all. You called out a Daily writer for for his misusage of “obselescence”. I’m sure you and I could have wonderful conversations about usage, but c’mon, you knew what he was saying. It’s not like he left out a “not” or a “never,” as in, ‘Bush has [word missing] said that he supports the Kyoto Treaty.’” That, BTW, has happened, and that sucks.

John
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 7:37 am
Are you arguing that the column was well-written? Did you read his whole piece? The misspelling was just one easy thing to point to and the easiest to document. I have a whole host of other comments, but most are more subjective. I had to read some of his sentences through three or four times to try to figure out what he was talking about. The style was ludicrous, and the whole thing read as if he wrote it more quickly than most people write blog comments. He’s missing commas everywhere, he used the wrong verb tense in at least four places, and the column was fully of errors of logic and outdated rhetorical devices. Read it, and then tell me if you really think it’s well-written. His confabulicating of worifications was probably the least of the problem, but much easier to explain in a short post. Anna
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 7:47 am
er, “full” not “fully”.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 7:49 am
Damn. I just posted the best counter argument ever and then lost it. But (starting a sentence with it!) I do think the column was fine. I read it and got what he had to say.
posted by John Honkala on February 4th, 2004 at 7:54 am
Oh yeah. My point was that you said it. Grammar matters. Shit, I notice it on a daily basis. But that doesn’t mean it’s right. You obviously have a good understanding of the language, so I don’t mean to slight you. It’s just that it seems nit-picky to me. I mean, fifty years ago it was improper to use “contact” as a verb. Nowadays, who cares. English is flexible, and as much as I hate to see words like “further” and “farther” get confused, there’s not much I can do about it. Plus, I still understand what the writer’s saying.

Also,
Most writers I knew at the Daily didn’t want to be journalists or writers (Sheesh!), I hate the semi-colon, and at least we can agree that Dubya’s a moron.
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 8:01 am
Wow. I’m really surprised. I have no doubt that you could get the essence of what he was trying to say — there was certainly enough repetition if you missed it the first time — but be honest. Did you really think it was well-written?

I’ll show it to a few friends and see what they have to say. I’m really curious now about whether I’m just imagining this whole dumbing-down of the Daily phenomenon. Maybe I’ve been overly spoiled by teaching smart kids and by reading, reviewing, and editing professional work.

If as people have been saying, they’re just college kids and can’t be expected to get it right, at what point people learn how to write properly? That’s an honest question.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 8:02 am
I’m very glad I don’t have to teach writing. No one ever taught me the rule book, so I am clueless about grammar. I don’t even understand the terminology, and I no longer have the time or patience to learn it.

I think I have good instincts, and I have had a lot of practice writing. Still, I’m sure my ignorance is obvious from the errors I make.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on February 4th, 2004 at 8:22 am
I guess they’re supposed to get it eventually. So, if Daily readers could have a breakdown of what class writers are in, perhaps that’d help clear some things up. Still, I think you’re missing my point: the point of that column was obvious. I know what he was saying and so does everyone else.

Save your grammar criticism for The New York Times, et al.

(Although, me being a big fence sitter, I think your criticism is important if read by editors. It won’t be, though, so it just sounds self-indulgent to me.)
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 8:27 am
John, Um, I thought you were the one who asked about why people rip on the Daily. I answered, you told me that was stupid. That’s why we’re having this discussion at all. You still haven’t answered the question of whether it was well-written, so I assume that even you don’t think it was.

I think that Piskor guy is either in his Senior or Junior year, and he’s on the editorial staff. His column sounds (and is) stupid — even ignoring the grammatical errors. Cleaning up the grammar would be a start, and would make it less grating, but having an idea worth expressing would be even better.

Larry, your grammar is fine. Lots of people follow grammatical rules without being able to articulate them. Actually, that’s sort of why I’m wondering when people learn this stuff. It always seemed like the Michigan students I taught (in the writing-in-the-disciplines program, I am not in English, I’m actually a scientist) either “got it” or didn’t, and no amount of coaching really helped. I also tutor inner city kids, and it’s almost impossible to help them learn to “hear” the errors, even though the kid I’m working with now is only 10 (John, before you jump down my throat, I am not trying to get him to speak or write like a UM student, and if I succeed in teaching him to read and never break him of any of his grammatical ticks, I’ll be thrilled. I’m actually not a mean person). I suspect that the building blocks of good writing are learned at a very young age and many are learned by being around parents who speak properly � so kids who grow up around well-educated parents have an edge.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 8:46 am
Okay, fine…it was well written. (Notice I didn’t hyphenate “well written” like you did — not an adjective.) Besides the grammar, you seem to have a problem with the message and the language, which you say is worn out. Fine. Think that. I found it inspiring and as clear as anything written in most daily newspapers around the country. How is his idea “stupid”? The point seems to be that people have been complacent or conservative or both for too long. The result of this, he says, is that the whole damn thing’s gonna collapse soon because it’s based on falsehoods and exaggerations. Disagree or not, it’s not a “stupid” idea. He’s obviously passionate and means what he says.

Again, shame on you for being so cynical if you were a teacher. You won’t teach much coming from that angle.
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 9:10 am
Actually, I pretty regularly get nominated for teaching prizes and have even won one or two.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. The gloom and doom message in his editorial has been used for decades in student papers, and depending on how you define “the whole thing” “it” hasn’t collapsed yet. I read it as self-justification for inaction on the part of the writer (i.e., it’s inevitable, I don’t have to work to make it happen).
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 9:18 am
Congratulations on those prizes.

If you wanna split hairs about “obsolete” and “obselescence,” good luck. Most of us get the difference. Most of us also don’t give a shit either way. That criticism is just not that valid.
You’ve apparently switched tacks here and are arguing that Piskor’s idea is stupid. You win, then, I guess, because, yeah, we’ll just have to agree to disagree. But that has nothing to do with the original point I was making. That is, it’s embarrssing that people like you — teachers at the U, no less — hammer writers many years their junior.

I doubt you’ll see too many wise 40-year-olds slamming you for your shortcomings. Usually you lose that chip at some point.
posted by John Honkala on February 4th, 2004 at 9:39 am
Honest criticism when you’re wrong — that’s what I expect from other grown-ups, and what I think I owe them. If that’s not the policy at the Daily, then I understand why the quality of writing is so bad.
posted by Sam on February 4th, 2004 at 10:12 am
I�m surprised that this needs to be explained but, you asked why people criticize the Daily. When I cited poor grammar and word choices in one piece, you replied with, “Yeah, grammar matters, but it’s not the only important thing.” I agree with you, it’s not the only important thing. I think it’s a start, but the idea matters, too. You said, (and I realize I am paraphrasing) “Yeah, but his idea was clear, and it was a good one. His grammar wasn�t perfect, but it was good enough to be able to understand his point.” I replied with, “I don’t agree, I think the idea is overdone, and not very good to begin with.”

I’m a little confused by your agenda. Do you agree that grammar is important or not? If you don’t think it’s of critical importance, do you at least agree that the idea is important? If you disagree with me and think that the column was good, that’s fine, but can we both at least agree that the ideas are important?

The only reason I care about the Daily at all (to the extent that I care, which is not much) is because I used to know the Editor-in-Chief and a couple people on the staff, and respected them (even looked up to them a little) and thought the paper used to be pretty good. It doesn’t appear to be good to me now. Maybe it’s because I’m shockingly old. Maybe it’s because I now teach somewhere where the paper is better. Maybe I’m imagining it, who knows?

I have respect for UM students, which is why I think they’re capable of better. I could just throw my hands in the air and say, “well, the paper represents the student body, whatever,” but I don’t think it does. Personally, I think mine is a more respectful stance than just dismissing the paper as mediocre but as good as it can be.

Finally, my work is constantly being critiqued, by my graduate students, other faculty, anonymous reviewers, action editors, copy editors, other researchers, et al. That’s part of the writing process, part of the research process, and part of excelling at anything — being critiqued, being held to high standards, and learning from it. Contrary to what you believe, people as shockingly old as 40 years are not beyond that.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 10:18 am
BTW, thanks, Sam. Being succinct has never been one of my strengths; you expressed it much more elegantly.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 10:24 am
Yes, grammar’s important, just not something on which we should judge ideas. And yes, the idea’s important. Of course.

As far as criticism goes, I didn’t mean to imply that it’s not important. But I shouldn’t have to stress the difference between someone who’s 21 and somone who’s 28 and someone who’s 28 and someone who’s 40.
Your criticism has not been the chummy criticism of colleagues or the professional criticism of critics. It has been smug. It has not been constructive or helpful. That’s what I have a problem with.
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 10:51 am
Okay, I know you aren’t in my profession, so I’ll explain to you what the criticism I get on a daily basis is like. My articles are normally reviewed anonymously, before any editors have at them. This is called “peer-review”. There is nothing — and I do mean nothing — chummy about it. It’s a contentious, vicious process, aimed at poking holes and finding flaws, and makes my criticisms look as if they are written by a sissy. It takes most scientific articles over a year to ever see the light of print — after they are submitted (not counting the years of research before the article is written).

I was appointed to my first faculty position at age 28. I was publishing well before that and, thus undergoing the peer-review process. I can tell you with great certainty that the people who critique my work and decide it’s up to snuff — people who are usually well over 40 — do not give a hoot about what my age is, and what stage I am in my career. Things are either good enough to be published, or they aren’t. Most of the review process is double-blind, with the reviewers not knowning who wrote the article, and the writers not knowning who the reviewers are. This is to ensure high standards in scholarly work. It’s business, it’s not personal. Welcome to life after college, where people don’t make excuses for you because you’re young or inexperienced.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 11:01 am
You are reinforcing my decision not to pursue a career in academia — bragging, elitism, self-righteousness.

I’ll take poor comma usage, thank you.
posted by John Honkala on February 4th, 2004 at 11:18 am
It’ll matter to some degree in almost any career you choose, if you care about being good at what you do and being well-respected.

Here we take the students’ views, as expressed in the newspaper, seriously. We often base pretty important policy decisions on what’s said in columns and editorials. Believe it or not, the administration and faculty will listen, if students let them. And believe it or not, they care what students think.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 11:25 am
Could it be that UM’s lack of a journalism program explains the lack of cohesive style and grammar in the Daily? Is it because nobody is teaching the staff AP Style (or NYT Style or whatever style)?
posted by Anonymous on February 4th, 2004 at 11:26 am
That’s certainly part of it. Everyone is a walk in. Usually no background whatsoever in journalism, much less AP style.
posted by John Honkala on February 4th, 2004 at 11:32 am
Huh — I don’t know — it never had a journalism program to my knowledge, and the grammar, style, content, etc. used to be OK. I think it’s a failure on the part of the editors to impress on the staff that that stuff’s important (to the degree that it is important, blah blah blah).
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 11:34 am
No, Anna, they got rid of their journalism program in the late ’90s. The rumor is that it was a move to eliminate a tenured professor that the University felt was not of the calibre they would have prefered. So they went for the scorched earth.
And while I am sure that you win awards and are published and yadda yadda yadda, you do that as a career and receive rewards for that. Noting the difference between the local “professional” paper (AA News) and the Daily, the Daily can easily rely on the simple excuse that they aren’t professionals (and that most of them have no real desire to be).
As far as the fangs of your contemporaries, I can only recall that wonderful cliche: “Fights in academia are so vicious purely because the stakes are so low.”
That, and if I had a year to get out every story that I wrote, I could be damned sure that it was properly constructed as well. With the rapid deadlines of print journalism, combined with the fact that the students are receiving no specialized instruction in the field, I think that they deserve a bit of a break.
Or to put it another way: you may be right, but you come across as a bitch with a stick up her ass.
js
posted by js on February 4th, 2004 at 12:48 pm
JS, you can always be counted on for ad hominem attacks.

Papers take a year in the review process, not in the writing process. I promise, I publish more pages a year, and am read by a wider audience, than you.

It’s interesting, and too bad, that the Daily has suffered from the lack of a journalism program. I didn�t realize they had one. Maybe that is the cause.

And as for your critique: I guess I’d rather be a smart successful bitch than an asshole idiot loser, but hey, to each his own.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 12:57 pm
I must have missed the death of the UM journalism program. The sudden disappearance of academic interest in and support for journalism would surely explain a decline in quality at the Daily.

But that being said, and without knowing the details or hearing the arguments that were made about it, my understanding is that university degree programs in journalism have not been a success.

(1) The number of graduates of such programs is vastly larger than the number of decently paying jobs available for them. So many of them end up as poverty-level part-time stringers, or not in the field at all.

(2) Most of the people with real jobs in journalism didn’t come out of journalism schools. (Admittedly this may not be as true now as it once was.)

If these are the case, and I think they are, I could well understand a decision to stop having a journalism program at UM.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on February 4th, 2004 at 1:40 pm
Aww, Anna, I can feel the love. I know that you can always be counted on for self-aggrandizement and an ability to miss the point.
Good to see that a smart, successful bitch still has trouble with reading comprehension. Makes the rest of us losers feel good.
Perhaps you can have one of your colleagues read that above comment to you again, and have them point out to you that appeals to personal superiority are meaningless when on a blog carping about a college newspaper from a town you used to live in. Or, to again put it another way, you may publish more pages, but I bet I’m more fun at a party.
js
posted by js on February 4th, 2004 at 1:40 pm
Hey Larry, to comment on your points-
1) You’re right, more people do come out of journalism programs than there are good paying jobs in journalism. It’s one of those things that you either have to do because you love doing it, or because you want to go into PR. Unfortunately, most go into PR.
2) That’s changed to some extent. It depends on the area and the paper. However, that argument is really true when applied to grad school journalists. Not only is it rare to find a journalist (reporter or editor) with a grad degree, it’s even rarer to find one with a journalism grad degree. Those with master’s tend to get shunned professionally, as it’s assumed that they don’t have the chops to work in the field.
And, to reference a post on goodspeed, the Daily still wins major awards for journalism. So somebody must like them.
js
posted by js on February 4th, 2004 at 1:45 pm
Maybe I did miss your point, JS, what was it other than to tell me that as a little girl, I shouldn’t think so much of myself, and that oh, I’m a bitch to boot? I could probably give you a pretty good run for your money at a party, although you could probably beat me in the smug, self-referential bullshit department. I guess you must have learned that after your 7th year as an undergrad.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 1:51 pm
Well, Anna, if you hadn’t been so busy looking to ascribe sexist and pejorative views to my comment, you might have done a little bit better. Read it again.
(Points broken down for you, in case all of your Ivy League education has left no room for common sense:
1) There was a journalism program; the journalism program no longer exists.
2) For an unpaid endeavor compared to the local “professional” paper, the Daily’s quality is only slightly lower.
3) Deadlines at a daily are different from those at academic journals, and often that means that stories needed to fill space get short grammatical shrift.
4) Your tone makes you sound like an asshole, even when you may be right in saying either that the Daily used to be better or that grammar is important.)
I hope that’s clearer now, Anna. I’m sorry you let your desire to make me out to be picking on you cloud your judgement. Perhaps being so quick to judge people’s success based on your own criteria has left you overly-sensitive to critiques of your merit in any field. Of course, I’ve obviously spent a long time just getting my degree and obviously haven’t done anything else, so what do I know?
js
posted by js on February 4th, 2004 at 2:31 pm
Women are often crticized for their “not-niceness” — esp. by men who are equally “not nice” in their criticisms of others. Take, for example, any number of your posts here or on goodspeedupdate. I don’t see you leveling those criticisms at any of the men who post who are not nice; you appear to save those criticisms for people who “should” be nice, nurturing, etc. etc. (i.e. women).

I agree with your second point, I’ve already said that I didn’t know about the first, and I think that even with mere moments, most of the work in the daily could be better.

I hope that clears it up for you. I’ve sent you my email address, please feel free to direct any other attacks my way privately.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 2:50 pm
Uh. Read those comments on Goodspeed again. I think that I’ve called Ruben and TJ assholes, retards and pig fuckers on a semi-regular basis. Perhaps even “asshats” as the mood moved me. Because that’s what they were acting like. You were acting like a prig, no matter your gender. Next time I will be more precise in my language, to avoid offending one looking to umbrage. I see no reason to email you.
js
posted by js on February 4th, 2004 at 3:09 pm
Clever. Yawn. So, who’s the bigger bitch, me for criticizing a newspaper at my alma mater, or you for going around the internet calling people pig-fuckers, retards, etc. etc. Emotional intelligence, indeed; you said it, not me. All right, keep toward your righteous goal of clearing the internet of pig-fuckers (good luck). I do have work to do, so I’m done with this thread. Honestly, JS, the whole pig/mud/likes/wrestles thing applies.
posted by Anna on February 4th, 2004 at 3:25 pm
You’re welcome, Anna. I probably owe you an apology for getting this whole bad-grammar theme started.

BTW, did anybody see the “Emilylou Harris” concert I read about in the AA News?

Sam
posted by Sam on February 5th, 2004 at 6:20 pm
I thought I wasted an hour of my life reading this page, then I realized that it bolstered my opinion that Michigan sucks. MSU rocks.
posted by AA sucks (and I'm not referring to the alcoholics) on March 26th, 2004 at 3:40 am