'Snark: It's Mean, It's Personal, and It's Ruining Our Conversation' by David Denby

Dialogue suppressed

More to the point, the problem with "Snark" is that Denby doesn't take it far enough. It's not snark, after all, that is the problem so much as all the sound and fury signifying nothing, the tendency of the media to comment less on the world than on themselves. Whatever happened to writing as communication, a way to share certain information, certain experiences, certain issues and beliefs? Whatever happened to the notion of engagement, the idea that media, such as they are, should be a two-way process, that we want to be part of a discussion rather than listen to a speech?

This is the critique that gets thrown around about traditional media -- that they're prescriptive, hierarchical, interested only in promoting their views. But if sites like Gawker are the alternative, we might as well give up and walk away.

No, what we need is a revolution in sensibility, a return to civil discourse, a way of opening, rather than closing down, debate.

This too is what Denby means to argue, that we deserve better, not just from our media outlets, but also from ourselves.

--

david.ulin@latimes.com