Margaret Wente is Wrong

by Art Fag City on March 19, 2010 · 60 comments Newswire

POST BY PADDY JOHNSON
gerhard richter, reading
Gerhard Richter, Reading, 1996

Did The Globe and Mail’s Margaret Wente bother doing any research at all before penning her article Why are bloggers male? I’m asking because she’s written close to 700 words on the subject of blogging being “a guy thing” and according to a 2009 study on the subject of content creation, remixing and sharing amongst teens and adults there are no major differences in gender.

Of course, the piece has now created enough online controversy that the paper has scheduled an online debate between Margaret Wente and female bloggers. I’m not sure why this is necessary since the entire column is based on a fallacy. The paper would do better to cite the pew results and explain why no one thought to question the biases that created such an out of touch op-ed column. As far as I’m concerned, this piece should have never seen the light of day.

{ 60 comments }

Simon Fleming March 19, 2010 at 3:36 pm

Couldn’t agree more. Was shaking my head the whole way through that waste of time piece.

Simon Fleming March 19, 2010 at 3:36 pm

Couldn’t agree more. Was shaking my head the whole way through that waste of time piece.

Simon Fleming March 19, 2010 at 11:36 am

Couldn’t agree more. Was shaking my head the whole way through that waste of time piece.

Nate March 19, 2010 at 4:00 pm

“Male answer syndrome”… is that anything like the ‘doesn’t do dishes syndrome’ afflicting my roommates?

Nate March 19, 2010 at 12:00 pm

“Male answer syndrome”… is that anything like the ‘doesn’t do dishes syndrome’ afflicting my roommates?

Ms. Seberg March 19, 2010 at 4:10 pm

I agree…it’s such a pointless article. I feel that if anything, I come across MORE female bloggers. I loathe debates and controversy around something that doesn’t exist.

xoxo
Ms. Seberg

Ms. Seberg March 19, 2010 at 4:10 pm

I agree…it’s such a pointless article. I feel that if anything, I come across MORE female bloggers. I loathe debates and controversy around something that doesn’t exist.

xoxo
Ms. Seberg

Ms. Seberg March 19, 2010 at 12:10 pm

I agree…it’s such a pointless article. I feel that if anything, I come across MORE female bloggers. I loathe debates and controversy around something that doesn’t exist.

xoxo
Ms. Seberg

mclea March 19, 2010 at 5:17 pm

Can we all agree that distinguishing between male and female bloggers is a stupid and pointless exercise?

Do all male or women bloggers share common attributes? Seriously, are we that stupid? The Globe Mail chat just served to illustrate the inanity of this discussion.

mclea March 19, 2010 at 1:17 pm

Can we all agree that distinguishing between male and female bloggers is a stupid and pointless exercise?

Do all male or women bloggers share common attributes? Seriously, are we that stupid? The Globe Mail chat just served to illustrate the inanity of this discussion.

SH March 19, 2010 at 5:32 pm

I agree Paddy! Did she do any research AT ALL for this story? And where exactly was her editor? Does she even have an editor or is she just doing whatever she wants over there? This article was almost as dreadful as the time she did a series about her experience taking public transit to work for a week and slumming with the masses. Come on Globe, shape up!

SH March 19, 2010 at 5:32 pm

I agree Paddy! Did she do any research AT ALL for this story? And where exactly was her editor? Does she even have an editor or is she just doing whatever she wants over there? This article was almost as dreadful as the time she did a series about her experience taking public transit to work for a week and slumming with the masses. Come on Globe, shape up!

SH March 19, 2010 at 1:32 pm

I agree Paddy! Did she do any research AT ALL for this story? And where exactly was her editor? Does she even have an editor or is she just doing whatever she wants over there? This article was almost as dreadful as the time she did a series about her experience taking public transit to work for a week and slumming with the masses. Come on Globe, shape up!

Marina Galperina March 19, 2010 at 7:33 pm

Blog blog blog.
Hmm… [looks down]
Nope, sill no penis.
Blog blog blog.

Marina Galperina March 19, 2010 at 7:33 pm

Blog blog blog.
Hmm… [looks down]
Nope, sill no penis.
Blog blog blog.

Marina Galperina March 19, 2010 at 7:33 pm

Blog blog blog.
Hmm… [looks down]
Nope, sill no penis.
Blog blog blog.

Marina Galperina March 19, 2010 at 3:33 pm

Blog blog blog.
Hmm… [looks down]
Nope, sill no penis.
Blog blog blog.

mlm March 19, 2010 at 9:16 pm

Anonymous is always male? Pseudonymous is always male?

Ha.

mlm March 19, 2010 at 9:16 pm

Anonymous is always male? Pseudonymous is always male?

Ha.

mlm March 19, 2010 at 9:16 pm

Anonymous is always male? Pseudonymous is always male?

Ha.

mlm March 19, 2010 at 5:16 pm

Anonymous is always male? Pseudonymous is always male?

Ha.

jane March 20, 2010 at 1:28 am

give her a chance to explain herself…

jane March 19, 2010 at 9:28 pm

give her a chance to explain herself…

Joanne Mattera March 20, 2010 at 4:57 am

Thanks for the link to the article, Paddy. I wasn’t aware of it. I’ve been too busy blogging and doing that other guy thing: painting.

Joanne Mattera March 20, 2010 at 4:57 am

Thanks for the link to the article, Paddy. I wasn’t aware of it. I’ve been too busy blogging and doing that other guy thing: painting.

Joanne Mattera March 20, 2010 at 12:57 am

Thanks for the link to the article, Paddy. I wasn’t aware of it. I’ve been too busy blogging and doing that other guy thing: painting.

JL March 20, 2010 at 11:24 am

Everyone knows that anonymous was a woman.

JL March 20, 2010 at 7:24 am

Everyone knows that anonymous was a woman.

TM March 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm

Margaret Wente not only doesn’t do much research, she doesn’t do any thinking before she writes her columns. And honestly, she has done actual harm as regards sensitive social issues. nnIn general the G&M is the NYT only 3 days to 6 months later. I say this as a Canadian who is forced to visit this site for news. nnAnd i got a sad as i hit ‘submit.’

TM March 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm

Margaret Wente not only doesn’t do much research, she doesn’t do any thinking before she writes her columns. And honestly, she has done actual harm as regards sensitive social issues. nnIn general the G&M is the NYT only 3 days to 6 months later. I say this as a Canadian who is forced to visit this site for news. nnAnd i got a sad as i hit ‘submit.’

TM March 20, 2010 at 8:46 pm

Margaret Wente not only doesn’t do much research, she doesn’t do any thinking before she writes her columns. And honestly, she has done actual harm as regards sensitive social issues. nnIn general the G&M is the NYT only 3 days to 6 months later. I say this as a Canadian who is forced to visit this site for news. nnAnd i got a sad as i hit ‘submit.’

TM March 20, 2010 at 4:46 pm

Margaret Wente not only doesn’t do much research, she doesn’t do any thinking before she writes her columns. And honestly, she has done actual harm as regards sensitive social issues. \n\nIn general the G&M is the NYT only 3 days to 6 months later. I say this as a Canadian who is forced to visit this site for news. \n\nAnd i got a sad as i hit ‘submit.’

@SFranciscoTweet March 21, 2010 at 5:34 am

I’m sure Arianna Huffington would be in agreement with you.

Margaret Wente was probably sucking up to her misogynist boss.

@SFranciscoTweet March 21, 2010 at 5:34 am

I’m sure Arianna Huffington would be in agreement with you.

Margaret Wente was probably sucking up to her misogynist boss.

@SFranciscoTweet March 21, 2010 at 1:34 am

I’m sure Arianna Huffington would be in agreement with you.

Margaret Wente was probably sucking up to her misogynist boss.

mustached March 21, 2010 at 8:52 am

i hate cubism

mustached March 21, 2010 at 8:52 am

i hate cubism

mustached March 21, 2010 at 8:52 am

i hate cubism

mustached March 21, 2010 at 4:52 am

i hate cubism

Kirsty Hall March 21, 2010 at 2:04 pm

It astounds me that people like this actually still have jobs. There are some great newspaper columnists out there but generally, I find far better writing in the blogs I read.

Kirsty Hall March 21, 2010 at 2:04 pm

It astounds me that people like this actually still have jobs. There are some great newspaper columnists out there but generally, I find far better writing in the blogs I read.

Kirsty Hall March 21, 2010 at 10:04 am

It astounds me that people like this actually still have jobs. There are some great newspaper columnists out there but generally, I find far better writing in the blogs I read.

c-mon March 22, 2010 at 6:06 pm

what’s hilarious is that she says that shooting your mouth of is a dude thing and then proceeds to shoot her mouth off for almost 700 words without providing a lick of evidence or engaging in that time-honored tradition known as *reporting.*

margaret wente is an idiot. hitting send.

c-mon March 22, 2010 at 6:06 pm

what’s hilarious is that she says that shooting your mouth of is a dude thing and then proceeds to shoot her mouth off for almost 700 words without providing a lick of evidence or engaging in that time-honored tradition known as *reporting.*

margaret wente is an idiot. hitting send.

c-mon March 22, 2010 at 6:06 pm

what’s hilarious is that she says that shooting your mouth of is a dude thing and then proceeds to shoot her mouth off for almost 700 words without providing a lick of evidence or engaging in that time-honored tradition known as *reporting.*

margaret wente is an idiot. hitting send.

c-mon March 22, 2010 at 6:06 pm

what’s hilarious is that she says that shooting your mouth of is a dude thing and then proceeds to shoot her mouth off for almost 700 words without providing a lick of evidence or engaging in that time-honored tradition known as *reporting.*

margaret wente is an idiot. hitting send.

c-mon March 22, 2010 at 2:06 pm

what’s hilarious is that she says that shooting your mouth of is a dude thing and then proceeds to shoot her mouth off for almost 700 words without providing a lick of evidence or engaging in that time-honored tradition known as *reporting.*

margaret wente is an idiot. hitting send.

Merriah Lamb March 23, 2010 at 11:36 pm

I really can’t believe that the Globe & Mail would publish such uniformed rubbish. Blogging and male machoism have very little in common. If Margaret Wente actually did her homework before writing this sexist / mindless dribble she would have realized that many of the best blogs out there are written by women. She sounds like a man hater.

Merriah Lamb March 23, 2010 at 11:36 pm

I really can’t believe that the Globe & Mail would publish such uniformed rubbish. Blogging and male machoism have very little in common. If Margaret Wente actually did her homework before writing this sexist / mindless dribble she would have realized that many of the best blogs out there are written by women. She sounds like a man hater.

Merriah Lamb March 23, 2010 at 7:36 pm

I really can’t believe that the Globe & Mail would publish such uniformed rubbish. Blogging and male machoism have very little in common. If Margaret Wente actually did her homework before writing this sexist / mindless dribble she would have realized that many of the best blogs out there are written by women. She sounds like a man hater.

@SFranciscoTweet March 24, 2010 at 6:38 am

Good commentary on the subject of Margaret Wente’s stupidity, out of Vancouver – http://www.maxfawcett.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/yes-margaret-wente-is-an-idiot/

@SFranciscoTweet March 24, 2010 at 6:38 am

Good commentary on the subject of Margaret Wente’s stupidity, out of Vancouver – http://www.maxfawcett.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/yes-margaret-wente-is-an-idiot/

@SFranciscoTweet March 24, 2010 at 6:38 am

Good commentary on the subject of Margaret Wente’s stupidity, out of Vancouver – http://www.maxfawcett.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/yes-margaret-wente-is-an-idiot/

@SFranciscoTweet March 24, 2010 at 6:38 am

Good commentary on the subject of Margaret Wente’s stupidity, out of Vancouver – http://www.maxfawcett.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/yes-margaret-wente-is-an-idiot/

@SFranciscoTweet March 24, 2010 at 2:38 am

Good commentary on the subject of Margaret Wente’s stupidity, out of Vancouver – http://www.maxfawcett.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/yes-margaret-wente-is-an-idiot/

VB March 31, 2010 at 1:53 am

Wente is an idiot-contrarian. She merely sub-vocalises the opposite of what is perceived as received-knowledge. As mentioned, she is a seller of newsprint to bystanders of train-wrecks. That she says things profitably makes sense.

But what are the editors of The Globe & Mail thinking? Are they morphing into exclamation!-blog-mode, or are they helplessly watching their credibility shrink before their eyes?

VB March 31, 2010 at 1:53 am

Wente is an idiot-contrarian. She merely sub-vocalises the opposite of what is perceived as received-knowledge. As mentioned, she is a seller of newsprint to bystanders of train-wrecks. That she says things profitably makes sense.

But what are the editors of The Globe & Mail thinking? Are they morphing into exclamation!-blog-mode, or are they helplessly watching their credibility shrink before their eyes?

VB March 31, 2010 at 1:53 am

Wente is an idiot-contrarian. She merely sub-vocalises the opposite of what is perceived as received-knowledge. As mentioned, she is a seller of newsprint to bystanders of train-wrecks. That she says things profitably makes sense.

But what are the editors of The Globe & Mail thinking? Are they morphing into exclamation!-blog-mode, or are they helplessly watching their credibility shrink before their eyes?

VB March 31, 2010 at 1:53 am

Wente is an idiot-contrarian. She merely sub-vocalises the opposite of what is perceived as received-knowledge. As mentioned, she is a seller of newsprint to bystanders of train-wrecks. That she says things profitably makes sense.

But what are the editors of The Globe & Mail thinking? Are they morphing into exclamation!-blog-mode, or are they helplessly watching their credibility shrink before their eyes?

VB March 30, 2010 at 9:53 pm

Wente is an idiot-contrarian. She merely sub-vocalises the opposite of what is perceived as received-knowledge. As mentioned, she is a seller of newsprint to bystanders of train-wrecks. That she says things profitably makes sense.

But what are the editors of The Globe & Mail thinking? Are they morphing into exclamation!-blog-mode, or are they helplessly watching their credibility shrink before their eyes?

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: