Blog, Blog, Blog Eat Blog

“Everybody wants to get into the act.”

—Comedian Jimmy Durante

What with all of the social media possibilities, it’s pretty much impossible to find anyone you know that doesn’t have some type of online chatter venue or outlet.

There are those who not only have their own interface, one they control, but post comments at the sites of others. Unfortunately, the rules of engagement, which to me should keep civility uppermost in mind, are slanted towards inequity. Nice goes by the wayside immediately. What could be places for vibrant dialogue, inherent in our free speech cultural values, at times degenerates all too quickly into venomous attacks.

One of my personal pet peeves from the inception and rapid rise in popularity of these blog/comments sections, maybe 10 years ago or so, was the anonymity factor. People gave the site managers their names and email addresses confidentially, but were allowed to create, to use made-up, unique names that stood out, were readily remembered. Funny at first, it got ugly fast.

Now, it’s possible to create completely anonymous, even manufactured or bogus identities and email accounts that make tracing the origin difficult for even the savviest of tekkies or litigation. There are even email accounts that erase data after 24 hours. Libel and slander, no fact-checking abound with no consequences, unfortunately with freedom both chaos and anarchy can exist too.

Some, as online browsers have noted, use “Anonymous”, although that makes some repartee even more bizarre as multiple, redundantly named non-related bloggers opt for that same moniker. Some use a form of an avatar, creating their own online mythological heroes. Some in fun, some to be menacing, some to be nasty.

Example: I argued like crazy with the editorial staff of the Orange County Register because they misquoted and/or quoted me out of context in several columns on the Upper Newport Bay dredging operation years ago. Scores of commentators (bloggers) then started in with the usual semi-profane invective, the anti-enviro protection, lunatic fringe aspersions that ecological leaders like myself always got.

None of the character assassins used their real name—except one: entrepreneur Richard Holmes. He lived in Laguna Beach, so I looked up his phone number. We chatted and realized that we weren’t really that far off from each other’s view. He had me over to his place and we became phone and email pals until his fatal heart attack a few years later.

Back to one of my points: Before about 2002, commentators signed up with the media site giving their true names, gave their addresses and phone/fax numbers for verification. Then their opinions (sometimes edited) surfaced in the “Letters-to-the-editor” section of our hard copy papers. The web has, advertently or not, made that passé.

This Register incident led me to realize that there were snipers out there, people who would hide to ambush the brave who posted their thoughts and reflections in their own legal names. I know, I know, before I get hacked to pieces after this is posted: A few use made-up weird names because they fear reprisals or blowback, I get that. The predominant numbers are really mean-spirited cowards—they feel safe insulting those who expose themselves to ridicule.

There’s no accountability, no personal responsibility, and blogs like this one in a sense promote or encourage that. The fallacy is that not all such exchanges are healthy, fair or justified. Just take the risk, post a topic—hell, any topic—and watch the insults and excrement fly. Make nice in reply, and they’ll eat you alive like piranha.

Many commentators go off onto tangents and sidebars, so it’s difficult to remember the original subject. Rage can rule. The posters call each other petty names, and start arguing among themselves about personalities instead of column topics.

They’re not totally without some redemptive aspects, so no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. It has been noted by psychologists recently that the advent and growth of email, social media and blogs is in direct correlation to an increasing sense of societal disconnection. The spiritual value of a sense of loss regarding “community” creates a background noise of anxiety and frustration. Anything that remotely resembles communication can be attractive—at least until the nasty ones run out of bullets!

----------

This week, after the , I piled onto my editor’s blog regarding that abrupt termination of an icon, a tradition albeit one that wasn’t really even a shadow of its former fun self when the Cabang family owned and operated it.

The general concepts I tried to introduced into the online discussion about the RH centered around our city’s commitment to our global image as a year-round destination resort and playground. Not as I want or like it, not my vision or that of many, no. This promotional concept is the one common thread, as our city council sanctions, as it funds, both the visitor’s bureau and funnels marketing dough to the Siamese twin Sister Cities coven.

If you’re a member or associate of these two groups, or a city hall sycophant, try to remind yourselves that no one who does public business should be above inspection, investigation or speculation. When we, as Americans, believe that self-analysis and criticism don’t belong, we’ll know that we’re in a fascist country.

And a simple warning: If they think that I’m the only one who wonders if these entities have become a self-ordained divinity, an elitist theocracy, perhaps not in  sync with our traditional heritage core values, then they’re deluding themselves.

Not one blogger seemed disturbed or inquisitive about the fact that the two aforementioned groups have about $1 million or so pouring through their purses with no real transparency or oversight. They have a type of non-profit status that precludes open books. They are “city approved,” whatever that means, but regarding their mission statements and goals, do they or do they not conform to what the overwhelming majority of residents want? That’s all I was asking about.

The city wants national and international tourism to flourish, to help prop up our increasing business closures, our commercial space failures of all kinds. I found it interesting that for many bloggers, LOCALS ONLY prevails, trumps everything else. If visitors want to kick up their expensive, trendy heels with some nightlife after 10 p.m., they should go elsewhere like Dana Point or Newport Beach, spend even more money taking cabs.

So we entice imports to sleep here, but want them to spend some of their money elsewhere. That doesn’t make fiscal sense, seems counter-intuitive—we want them to stay here so that we get all of their bucks, the sales taxes, etc., don’t we? Has it occurred to anyone that if we don’t deliver what we offer, then these tourists will just stay in Newport or Dana Point instead, not even bother coming here because of the travel logistics?

Having seen the bumper sticker “Welcome to Laguna, Now Go Home,” I wasn’t shocked. There’s a lot of resentment from natives and long-time locals. We get tired of being put under siege and gridlocked during our former peak quarter, our high seasons historically determined by the art festivals. Now the city and visitor’s bureau apparently want that to be every day.

Knowing the online rules and flaws, I understand that I can’t ever find out who chastised, who berated me in that particular blog. I tried to educate, engage and introduce causal factors that appear to be in conflict with increasing our empty coffers. So warts and all, as a Vietnam-era Marine, I guess one must accept that shooting gallery. Pass me the cigarette (the funny kind, if it’s to be my last) and a paisley blindfold.

I guess like marriage, for better or for worse, blogging is here until death do us part. For those brave enough to openly sign their names, whether in their own blogs or in others, I give you the Roman centurion pledge: “Morituri te salutant!” (We about to die salute you).

For those innocents who use a nom de plume to protect themselves, their families and/or livelihood from mischief, I apologize and hold you harmless.

Personally my rhetoric here and at www.salem-news.com (a highly trafficked online magazine I also write for) is intended to reach a bigger audience, to provoke more dialogue about any subject that crosses my mind. I figuratively “wrote” this column in my head while immersed in my running regime.

Many blogs or comments posted about my thoughts have some resonance, some apparent merit, I’ve made new friends, found like-minded sympathizers and yes, I’m the one who has been educated ... and corrected, if in error. It’s not such a bad thing, to find out that one is not alone regarding certain concerns or that readers can be gentle without being pissy or prissy.

Compared to the more seasoned veterans, especially the under-40 crowd who habitually use text message cryptography, abbreviations and coded acronyms, I’m back in the Dark Ages, because I actually write whole words, I clarify, I explain myself and my context to avoid misunderstandings.

Clueless Mayor Jane Egly opened an account with Laguna Beach Patch three weeks ago, and is she ever back in the Jurassic Blog Age. I browsed her original posting and thought: OMG, WTF, LOL.

She was nonetheless warmly welcomed and embraced into the Laguna Beach Patch fold, her further thoughts and insights encouraged by Nathan Anderson and Robin Wethe Altman.

I blogged Jane, mea culpa, it was my turn to challenge a blogger, and in her case because her marketing and PR rationale was obvious: Positioning. She’s a politician, she’s running for re-election, so she saw an opportunity (without spending a penny from her campaign coffers) to be prominent online. So I poked a metaphorical stick into her blog cage.

Read her first “Gee Whiz & Golly Gee Willickers” posting dated April 7: Kindly grandmother type, she actually posted the definition of a blog at a blog! If that isn’t didactic, I don’t know what is. Hello? We’re at a blog site, Jane, you really ARE out of touch; as if (surprise!) the entire idea and phenomenon just appeared out of the blue on April 6—so you’ll of course explain it to us because you teach law?

And now, after three weeks? Nothing. Not a subsequent peep, tweet, blog posting, nothing. So those who thought she’d become bold, modern, courageously share something personal or intimate that she doesn’t blabber elsewhere must be wondering like I am.

She claims to have been a trial attorney, why didn’t she respond to my covert confrontation or the other parties' optimistic invites, prove to me and Laguna that she can be openly engaged on a level playing field? Not at a city council meeting where she can safely control the discussion ... c’mon, right out here on the streets with the masses.

She’s already got our PC weeklies lapping at her feet, printing her infomercial propaganda—what is she afraid of? Like I said, it’s not complicated, Jane ... if you can’t take the heat, don’t go in or near the blog kitchen. Hide behind that hat and enigmatic smile, at least until you’ve duped the locals into getting re-elected.

And Jane? You haven’t fooled me: “Res Ipsa Loquitor” counselor.