3 ms·
This is one of the problems with text-based communication. While I personally don't understand how Topolsky translates MG's automotive analogy into "class warfa
by SnowLprd 15y ago
This is one of the problems with text-based communication. While I personally don't understand how Topolsky translates MG's automotive analogy into "class warfare," these types of misunderstandings are common when people aren't having a real-time conversation. If Topolsky were to talk about this on the phone with either MG or Gruber, he'd find his entire viewpoint changed within minutes. It's very possible that he is attributing "elitist" attitudes where they don't exist, but that's hard to know without a direct, real-time conversation.
I've seen this with my own co-workers on a daily basis. What seems like a contentious conversation via email/IM becomes a complete non-issue when discussed by phone or in person. The difference can be striking.
- doron 15y agoPerhaps, but people who make their living as writers, should be more of aware of the power and drawbacks of analogies they use.
- realize 15y agoWhat makes you think he isn't aware? He writes opinion pieces, so having a strong point-of-view is sort of required. And look how much attention he gets from it. I'd rather an inflammatory strong opinion than a wishy-washy falsely "balanced" piece.
- SnowLprd 15y agoA similar claim could easily be made here regarding Topolsky's post, along the lines of: "For someone who makes his living as a journalist, Topolsky should be more aware of "checking in" regarding MG's viewpoint. For example: 'It seems like your review implies that iOS fans are somehow more sophisticated than Android fans. Is that what you meant?'" This concept of "checking in" is a core component of effective human interaction that is, sadly, altogether too infrequent.