Journalists like to criticise. They make a living out of it. Like most people who like to criticise, they are not averse to doing so unfairly. If things are going smoothly, they have nothing to write about.
Journalism is about making the most attention-grabbing piece possible, to get your name known. It’s about sensationalism and using the most emotive language possible in order to provoke reaction.
I’m not a journalist. I’m a developer. During the time when I’m not writing code for a living, I try to contribute to the KDE project.
KDE is a community project. The motivations of the contributors vary. The vast majority of people work on KDE for free, that is, they aren’t paid. Contributors to KDE do not expect or demand anything in return for their efforts.
As with any large, public project, there is always some press attention. With KDE, the attention has been overwhelmingly positive. At times it is ill-informed, places focus on areas that seem strange to the contributors, or gets its facts wrong. Nonetheless, it is usually respectful and honest.
On thankfully rare occasions, the media spotlight flickers over reporting which seeks, above all, to deride, discredit and disparage.
Those of us who’ve been around community-based projects for some time are well used to puerile abuse for the sake of self-satisfaction. Such insults are often public, but are left to rot in the feedback section of a little-known web page. Contributors to project xyz usually pass over such comments with little more than a smirk.
Sad to say, the reporter who is looking to gain hits to their website, and therefore exposure, is often able to persuade the major relevant news outlets to at least link to them. This most often occurs when the writer is nurturing a chip on their shoulder and has mouthed off in the form of HTML.
People love a heated argument. It makes life more interesting. I myself cannot help but play devil’s advocate in the hope of making a banal conversation that little bit more interesting.
What has never appealed to me, however, is cowardly back-biting. The common form is this: first feign some kind of friendliness towards the victim. You must appear to be a nice person. Secondly, pretend that you have been ill-treated. You’re the victim of abuse. All you wanted was to help. Lastly, scatter as many difficult-to-disprove untruths about the victim as you can.
It doesn’t really matter if your words are not sage and sincere, you can be assured of plenty of feedback whatever you write, as long as you follow the rules above. Remember, more truth equals more intelligent readership and feedback. If you want intelligent readership, you’re better off being less opinionated, avoiding whining and sticking to facts.
As a contributor to a project like KDE, it’s difficult to avoid becoming frustrated when you see people who are intent on pushing a negative agenda gaining more media coverage than they really deserve (which is none.)
Criticism is generally more than welcome, in fact encouraged. If the contributors to KDE did not intend to attract criticism, they would not maintain a huge database of problem (bug) reports and spend a huge amount of time answering questions on mailing lists, often resolving issues within minutes.
A contributor to an open project expects criticism, but they also hope that it will be delivered in a civil tongue, with appropriate respect shown. Of course one expects a portion of feedback to be neither civil nor respectful.
There is a big difference between calling someone names to their face and attempting to call someone names to everyone you possibly can. There is a big difference between honest criticism and throwing mud in the hope that it will stick.
It would be naïve to expect gentlemanly conduct from the press, but nevertheless I will continue to wish for a world in which respect is given where it is due.