Readers and bullies and trolls, oh my

 

Bill Knight column for 3-8, 9 or 10, 2021

 Dealing with bullies isn’t easy. I’ve never known how to effectively manage them.

For instance, I was five when our Kindergarten class in the cozy basement of our coal-heated, brick grade school did a short play: “The Three Billy Goats Gruff.”

The teacher narrated, so we had no dialogue but acted out the plot, about three goat brothers who run out of grass and need to cross a bridge to a pasture, a bridge beneath which lived an offensive, terrible troll who was said to block passage AND eat those who tried to pass.

 The youngest goat goes first, encounters the troll who threatens to gobble him up, but the small goat persuades the troll to let him by and wait for his older brother, who’d make a bigger meal. The middle goat follows, confronts the mean troll, who’s once again coaxed to let the second goat pass because a bigger brother is coming. The oldest goat steps on the bridge and the ravenous troll stops him and announces he’s going to devour him. But the big billy goat laughs and knocks the troll off the bridge and into the river, which carries him away.

I was the third billy goat and head-butted a classmate into the floor. Crying and chaos erupted.

“That was the story!” I said.

The teacher didn’t spank me, but I had to stand in a cloakroom for a while. OK; lesson learned.

Fast-forward a decade, and I began to be “an enemy of the people,” as fools say, by covering high school football as a 16-year-old writer for my hometown weekly. My impression of reporting was from TV’s “Adventures of Superman” and “Tombstone Territory,” which made newspapers seem exciting and easy. (Well: yes and no.)

What turned into a long career might confirm a thought from journalist and novelist Anna Quindlen, who said, “Being a reporter is as much a diagnosis as a job description.”

I’ve worked in the newspaper industry in large, mid-size and small markets, and there were similarities, like complaints. (Few readers compliment journalists for doing a good job; they expect that.) The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) has a four-point Code of Ethics: Seek the truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, and be accountable. Be accountable meant, to every editor I’ve worked for, being accessible and polite to callers, even the most incensed loudmouths, and staying on the line UNLESS they start swearing. THEN we could hang up.

Most weren’t vulgar, and some had good points that led to a follow-up story or correction, and a few failed to note the difference between news and opinion. Of course, the world changed, from manual typewriters to computers, and the development of the World Wide Web and offshoots Twitter, Facebook, email, etc., created both wonders and nastiness.

Digital “feedback” replaced phone calls, letting people post the rudest crap-a-doodle-do as they sit at their screens and scream and rant and rave.

Still, they’re readers, so I rarely argue. After all, I value them all, even if they’re angry, mistaken or clownish. If a reader posts that they’re a subscriber and praises the nonsensical conspiracies promoted by “Q,” I may reply, “Q was my favorite character on “Star Trek: The Next Generation.”

Or, I look for common ground, changing the subject to movies, music or baseball. That can create calm.

But I’m occasionally stunned. A reader named Keith contacted me. “Your editorial on Trump's tantrums was opinionated bull***t,” he explained. “If you want to write a decent editorial, then be unbiased. You're a gaslighter; total nutjob and libtard.”

On the other hand, sometimes I’m pleasantly surprised.

Bob emailed, “I am late in reading the paper and just now read your article from Jan. 2. Though the events of Jan. 6 were shocking, I thought it is worth noting that you basically ‘called it’ in terms of the Trump-supported insurrection that day. Many of us feared something like that could happen, but your article provided a prediction of the violent demonstration as well as explanation of events leading up to them.

“I guess I need to catch up on my paper reading to see what else you have shared.”

Another, Jim, expressed gratitude!

“I thoroughly enjoyed your article. Word needs to get out what really happened. Articles like this really help to get the word out to the American people. Thank you.”

Then, an email subject line caught my eye: “Thank you for your work, dedication and fearlessness.”

Wait. That can’t count. It came from SPJ.

Anyway, thanks for being readers – even trolls.

But let folks cross bridges.