Updates From the World of Journalism + a Clarification

[bookshop]

Hi, LJ / DW!

I am so very remiss in letting you guys know where I've been and what I've been writing, but I do have a couple of quick updates for you:

AfterElton has asked me to be one of their 5 new "slash experts" for their brand-new column on slash fandom, The Shipping News! I'm so excited, omg! And I have to thank the Daily Dot for letting

Comments

[anonymous]

"The sources I used for this article came from three interviews (cited in the article) and the Fanlore talk page and revision history."

I don't have a stake in this as I'm not a podficcer, but I've seen conversations about the fanlore issue on twitter and in people's journals and I'm not even on twitter nor do I make it a point to follow podfic fandom. But I do have experience following fandom conversations -- about OTW, about Yuletide, about racefail, about character meta, etc -- and it seems odd to me that you wouldn't look for other places outside of the wiki to see if the conversation was happening elsewhere. Not the anon meme, but in other places -- like people's twitter accounts or journals -- where they are using their pseud/name and can be linked up to their identity on the wiki.

So I guess my question is what does qualify as having enough sources and background? Because I was shocked that you only talked to three people and read a wiki history page when clearly the issue had come up in other venues. That's what fandom does, we're multiplatform and we have conversations in many locations all at once. To not go to people's ljs or twitters or tumblrs to see if there was more to the story seems odd to me.

This also reminded me, albeit on a smaller scale, of the discussions regarding fact checking recently. In particular this article: http://www.oxfordamerican.org/articles/2012/aug/27/new-south-journalism-fact-checking-feature The article ends with this: "Essayistic truth is both factual and beyond simple assemblages of facts." And it seems like you're getting the second part of that wrong. And while I don't have a stake in the article as a podficcer, I do have a stake in how people represent fandom in the media and, despite being a fan yourself, I'm wary of how you're representing us. Just being in fandom doesn't give you a pass.

(anon cause I hate wank, but wanted to toss my two cents in; I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt in your articles so far, but I think you can do better)