Readers' responsibility.

Fischer, Mark

SJR: What's a reader's responsibility to journalism?

I noticed in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, March 6, "Donnybrook"er Colleen Campbell, was featured on page B9 in a section titled "Point of View." I am as perplexed by the porn phenomenon as she seems to be, but her "POV," though adequately expressed in complete sentences, seems very poorly reasoned. I know her piece wasn't intended for an academic audience, but the complexity of the subject matter seemed to deserve a less facile analysis.

Feminism, pornography and dignity in 200 words or less?

I do believe in being charitable, but how should readers treat such "fluff' from an author, television and radio host and St. Louis-based fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center? Is this only intended by the Post as filler? Could it have actually been more responsibly written by Campbell and then edited for content or space limitations after submission, thus turning good writing into stale cliche?

It may be very unfair of me to say, but it reads like an old book review that was recycled and phoned-in by a freelancer looking to take up space for a buck.

What does it actually say--that some mainstream choices might ironically end rather regrettably? That's thought-provoking cultural criticism worthy of print? Maybe in a Suburban Journal or a college newspaper, but a major city publication? And for pay?

I don't know whether I should be critical of the author, the paper and its editors or the audience that has turned the "Donnybrook"ers into such beloved enablers of predictable local prejudice and uncritical thinking. Do readers have an obligation to express disagreement, or should I find something better to do than scold someone who probably knows better? Does opinion-page writing adhere to different critical standards or any standards at all?

Mark Fischer

Wentzville