47 Comments

1. Fausta:

Right on, Roger!

Mar 15, 2005 - 7:22 am 2. Rick Ballard:

I hope LaShawn , Michelle and Michael don’t find out that they are ignored.

I’d miss them if they quit. So would some tens (hundreds?) of thousands of others.

Mar 15, 2005 - 7:27 am 3. VRWconspiracy:

Blogging is a kind of free market — and more free than shopping at your local supermarket. There are no deals with the mainstream producers to block you from getting shelf space, so to speak. You grow according to your ability to satisfy your end customers … er, readers. There are no controls — thus no fascist gagging of free speech. This seems to offend those thin skinned power players who are looking for ways to shut off dissent. Using the McCain Feingold law is the latest gambit of the neofascists to shut down criticism. The various “hate speech” laws and codes were earlier, and still on going, assaults on our freedom of speech.

Mar 15, 2005 - 7:48 am 4. angry_in_t_o:

Apparently the problem is that “It’s white people linking to other white people!”

OK, from now on, stop posting new content on blogs. Put up a synopsis of the particular minority victim group you belong to. Bloggers will visit each other’s blogs and create links as required to make sure we reach a quota (the Newsweek article suggests 10 such links per blog) of minority blogs. Note that blogs by Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice won’t count.

If you can’t hit you quota for one minority group, you can trade links with others. Blogs as pogs, as it were.

Sounds like…fun. Yeah. Good idea…really.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:26 am 5. Silicon valley Jim:

I think that VWRC hits the nail on the head with the reference to a free market. It’s also a less-bundled market. The New York Times must have a hard time knowing whether people buy it because of Maureen Dowd’s columns or its foreign news coverage or Paul Krugman’s columns or its coverage of domestic affairs, etc. People visit or don’t visit http://www.rogerlsimon.com because of Roger’s writing. The only reason that I say “less-bundled” rather than “unbundled” is that there are group blogs; the folks at Powerline don’t know (and probably don’t care, actually) whether people visit because of Hindrocket, the Big Trunk, or the deacon.

Competition is a wonderful thing, and, the more perfect the competition is, the more wonderful are its consequences.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:27 am 6. Robert Schwartz:

Levy wrote a book called Hackers, which was a history of “white hat” computer hackers from the 1950s thorgh the 1970s.

It was a pretty good read. After that he became a cyber pundit for Newsweek, the Official Newsletter of the Liberal Media Establishment(TM).

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:28 am 7. triticale:

Actually, what scares the writers at the New York Times is the percentage of people who take the paper for the crossword puzzle. I still really prefer working such on paper, the one thing for which that is true.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:40 am 8. Duke:

Totally bogus:

#1 I have written two articles and three fiction pieces for “women’s mags” who are known to refuse any picece written by a man. Answer: I use a woman’s name and have a DBA with same so I can bank the checks. Fuck them.

#2. How the hell are we supposed to know who is Black? Are they supposed to sign their blogs Rastus, Roosevelt, Malcolm X? Or preface every piece with, “As a Black man….?” What total bullshit.

#3. Jesus, there are a shitload of women on the web and I think Michelle has a list of attack dogs who can stand the heat. Anybody want to tell Ann Coulter to shut the fuck up and vaccuum the rug?

Everybody just “Shut up and Write.”

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:43 am 9. LouMinatti:

Roger, anyone can gather a large readship via blogging. All they need to do is write well and write often.

I am perplexed and at the same time amused by those in the media that don’t get the “blogging thing”. For example, my hometown newspaper is the Houston Chronicle. Like most, it is struggling with circulation problems. I can imagine the editorial meeting when a Chronicle insider stuck up her hand and said “We need a blog, and I am the one to do it!” So “MeMo” is born:

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/features/3084457

Be careful, though. If you click around too much you’ll run across the dreaded “REGISTRATION IS FREE AND EASY! You get these benefits….”

Stupidity. Placing barriers increases readership…. how, exactly?

Mar 15, 2005 - 9:31 am 10. Anondson:

This is entirely anecdotal, but I would posit that men are underrepresented in the blogosphere.

Why?

LiveJournal. It’s demographic is mostly young women blogging about themselves and their personal interests. I mention LiveJournal only because my wife has a pseudonymous blog there on her hobby of becoming an author. She also follows hundreds of fan-blogs (blogs that focus on the movies, tv shows, celebrities, or fiction genres), outside of particular sci-fi niches these blogs are mostly done by women. She follows the fan-fiction blogs which are about 95% done by women. My wife mentions that there are countless blogs on these subjects clustered on LiveJournal… apparently the “friends list” is found to be particularly useful to many folks who blog in these subjects.

Men probably are overrepresented in the current events/politics niche of blogging. But that is far from the only thing that is blogged. Personalblogs far outnumber current events/politics blogs.

The demographics of bloggers, I repeat, are probably skewed to young girls.

However, the demographics of bloggers who are competing with the MSM are certainly skewed to white men. Let me propose a theory… it is because white men believe their voice is underrepresented in new analysis. Not white men demographically, but the average white man’s voice. And that is what blogging is all about, getting your voice out there. Does Steven Levy deny that the NASCAR crowd is sufficiently represented in his profession? There has been underappreciation among the MSM for white men’s dissatisfaction with their perspective being represented truthfully or even balanced.

This extreme dissaatisfaction combined with men’s knack at being early adopters of new technology (blogging) is natural. This is probably simplistic, but it can’t be any less simplistic than Mr. Levy’s article, and I would wager gets closer to the sociological reasons than Mr. Levy wants to know or acknowledge.

Mar 15, 2005 - 10:32 am 11. Frederick:

“… the fuddy duddies of the legacy media are now beginning to embarrass themselves.” Yes. First they were like cows watching cars go by on an interstate highway. Ignoring didn’t work. Now they’re like a primitive people calling on their shamans to make the blogosphere go away. The sneer spell didn’t work. The credential spell didn’t work. Now they’ll try try the age old diversity and equality ceremonies. Their spells and ceremonies once worked. No longer. We have better magic. Information. Intelligence. Freedom.

Mar 15, 2005 - 11:12 am 12. Old Dad:

Does anyone seriously consider race, gender, or sexual orientation when selecting blogs to read?

Does anyone really care?

Mar 15, 2005 - 11:33 am 13. richard mcenroe:

Old Dad _ Well, if that honey in the jewelry ads over at Little Green Footballs was to start a blog, I just might…

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:06 pm 14. f15c:

I read Levy’s article, and like Roger, found it dull. No new thoughts, no original ideas, just the standard fill-in-the-blanks template drivel from “Diversity For Idiots 101″ with the standard villians - white guys. Ho. Hum.

As far as I can tell, the vast majority of people who blog do so out of personal motivation. By-and-large, people who really, really want to blog, blog. Those who don’t either don’t want to, don’t care about the whole phemom, or are totally unaware of the medium.

Show us actual distinct, verifiable cases of non-white-guy wannabe bloggers not doing so because of white-guys. No hyperbolic, breathless victim-ese, just clear citations of verifiable cases. Ok, even half-way verifiable cases would do. We can then engage those people in the discussion.

How about instead of blaming white-guys for the perceived lack of non-white-guy bloggers, ask non-white-guy non-bloggers why they don’t blog. Engage non-white-guy bloggers in the discussion instead of engaging in the typical condescending liberal practice of talking about them instead of talking with them.

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:18 pm 15. Old Dad:

richard mcenroe:

I stand corrected. The blogs that focus on, ahem, the arts are special. Who needs politics when you have real, umm, talent.

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:18 pm 16. Terrye:

I read that there are about 7 million blogs. So how does this guy know who is represented? Has he read them all?

I thought about blogging myself, but I don’t think I am that dedicated.

And I am a woman. The fact that I am female is not as important as personality and writing ability.

I think the greatest challenge is getting people to read your blog. There are a lot of very smart and talented people out there blogging and nobody knows they are there.

Maybe the ones we hear about are the ones that get linked to or are in some respect unique.

As to why blacks are not represented…how do we know that they aren’t? Who keeps track?

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:20 pm 17. Carol_Herman:

Look under any good man and you’ll find a good woman. Or, a good companion.

The stupid thing about much of PC is how false it is when it tries to contain human behaviors to their scripts. How did those idiots get so much power?

There’s no such thing, once someone gets enough money to spend on non-essentials to think that only one sex benefits, while no one else on the planet earth, benefits.

Sadder even to realize that what was once major contributors to communication has become so dulled.

You know, the opposite was once true when the first telephones were distributed. People talked freely even though they were connected to each other through operators, who could’a heard everything.

Now, the elites have no idea what we say to one another! Can you imagine that? Being so out of touch, the captain of the Titanic couldn’t hear the passenger that couldn’t sleep; so he was walkinhg the deck, screaming: ICEBERG AHEAD!

Is this the same limitations of sound when trees fall in a forest?

And, to think, before WW2, LOOK published J.D. Salinger. And,Hemingway once wrote for print magazines. How do we tell the children that once,many yesterdays ago, sitting and waiting for service (from barbershops to doctors’ visits) … you could be entertained for hours … reading the magazines … which were printed on such glossy, wonderful stock. And, you could see a Norman Rockwell, too, gracing the front cover.

How exactly do you squander riches like that?

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:41 pm 18. Carol_Herman:

OT, Drudge is running the headline that Diane Diamond, supposedly a journalist for Court TV, called the Michael Jackson prosecutor to report she found (when interviewing) a guy who owns personal stuff from Michael, a pair of used underpants.

Here, we have CNN, who’d refuse to warn our military of impending terrorist events; but this lady can work with the prosecution team, and also call herself a reporter?

The MSM has grown into a CANCER. What does the patient look like when this gets surgically removed? And, can it be removed, surgically?

Mar 15, 2005 - 12:44 pm 19. Kevin P:

Roger:

Blogs are the most democratic form of information sharing ever invented. Most of the founding fathers of our country would rejoice at the notion that with a small investment any citizen has the freedom to write whatever they want, that if they have the writing chops there is no limit on the number of readers they can attract. There is no boss to kowtow to, no sponsor that you have to worry about offending.There is no tenure in blogging. I check out Roger everyday because I enjoy what he writes. If he gets bored and decides to start posting crap there is no boss to protect his butt,ala CBS, people will just stop coming back. Blogs are based on complete access and complete meritocracy.This is why it scares the aristocracy of the lords of the MSM.They are being scrutinized and they have to share the spotlight.They can’t, so far, stop anyone from expressing their mind and having millions of people read their idea’s.They don’t have complete control anymore and it drives them crazy.Luddites always strike out at what scares them. They are like the men who fought so hard to deny women the right to vote. When you have ruled the roost for so long it is very hard to share power, even a small slice of it.

Mar 15, 2005 - 1:13 pm 20. Mike_Nargizian:

http://instapundit.com/archives/021742.php

Mar 15, 2005 - 1:18 pm 21. Old Grouch:

First they said:   ”Don’t pay any attention to weblogs: They’re just rantings by a bunch of amateurs who live in their parents’ basements and write in their pajamas.”Next they said:   ”There’s nothing new in weblogs: They don’t do any original reporting.”Then they said:   ”You can’t trust weblogs: They don’t have any editors or fact-checkers.”Now they say:   ”You can’t rely on weblogs: They’re not representative because they’re all written by white males.”And soon they’ll say:   ”….?” [any ideas?]Anybody else suspicious about the “diversity” argument being the last refuge of scoundrels?

Mar 15, 2005 - 1:21 pm 22. rgvdh:

What we are seeing is the panic of someone who has been indoctrinated in the ways of “diversity” upon encountering a situation in which equality of opportunity is in place, equality of result is not the result, and worst of all, equality of result can not be enforced.

VRWConspiracy sez:

“There are no controls — thus no fascist gagging of free speech”

Yup. Especially not of the PC kind that fell all over Summers’ head when he dared suggest that “discrimination” may not be the only possible reason that fewer women than men are professors of physics and chemistry,

and f15c sez:

“Show us actual distinct, verifiable cases of non-white-guy wannabe bloggers not doing so because of white-guys. No hyperbolic, breathless victim-ese, just clear citations of verifiable cases. Ok, even half-way verifiable cases would do. We can then engage those people in the discussion. ”

Oh No! No no no no no!

If this standard is applied in the blogosphere, people will start asking why it can’t be applied to employment or college admissions. And if this standard were applied to employment or worse yet to college admissions, it would cause the collapse of the entire “diversity” industry. This would have the side effect of causing a lot of painful cognitive dissonance among those it has indoctrinated, including presumably Mr. Levy.

Mar 15, 2005 - 1:35 pm 23. ahem:

This has to be the most tiresome, deadly, rotten meme in the universe. Isn’t there some way we can put a stake through its heart?

I don’t understand why some people feel compelled to discard all their intellectual and artistic freedom in order to fit themselves into one or more small containers. It must be something you do if you have too much time on your hands or can’t figure out a way to otherwise prevail.

Blogging has to be the most democratic medium since the dawn of time. Daily, I read the work of people I’d never ordinarily meet, much less know. It’s inherently an impartial medium: ideas are all.

And as far as the writing itself is concerned, art has one virtue: originality. If your writing is interesting and original, readers will find you whether you be Male, Female or Undecided.

——-

p.s. If you’re interested in writing and haven’t already read it, read Vladimir Nabokov’s “Strong Opinions’.

Mar 15, 2005 - 1:45 pm 24. AST:

This post and the comments here illustrate the vapidity of Levy’s column. Any one of the comment posters here could write a better, more cogent piece than this guy.

Mar 15, 2005 - 2:03 pm 25. Ed Poinsett:

IMHO, Diane Dimond is to Michael Jackson as Mary Mapes is to George Bush.

Mar 15, 2005 - 2:36 pm 26. Jim C.:

Old Grouch, excellent analysis.

Mar 15, 2005 - 2:43 pm 27. f15c:

rgvdh: “What we are seeing is the panic of someone who has been indoctrinated in the ways of “diversity” upon encountering a situation in which equality of opportunity is in place, equality of result is not the result, and worst of all, equality of result can not be enforced.”

Bingo. They say they want equality? They can’t *deal* with Equality.

To paraphrase Duke from earlier in these comments (whose color/race/sex/sexual-preference/age/food-likes by the way I don’t know and don’t care to know): Why can’t we all just “shut up and write”.

Mar 15, 2005 - 2:50 pm 28. Richard Nieporent:

Roger, I saw a link to that article by Steve Levy on Sunday. I could not believe that anyone, let alone a journalist, could write something that basically says we have no right to decide with whom we want to exchange ideas with. Instead, Big Brother will tell us who we are allowed to communicate with.

I was so outraged that I sent him an email and quite surprisingly he answered me. Basically he believes that there should be affirmative action for the blogosphere! I wrote back to him and explained to him what I though about his ideas. Our email exchange is posted below.

From: Richard Nieporent

Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:44:51 PM US/Eastern

To: “Levy, Steven”

Subject: Re: Blogging Beyond the Men’s Club

Steve,

I am delighted that you actually responded to my somewhat acerbic comments. When I was first directed to your article, I was not sure whether or not it was going to be a satire. Surely, you did not subscribe to the concept that there was a need to mandate diversity in voluntary associations between people. As a journalist, you, more than the average person, should respect all of the freedoms that the First Amendment gives us. What could be more fundamental that the freedom of association? What can be more important than to have the freedom to express our ideas with anyone that we choose to? To me, these principles are the basis for a free and democratic society.

Since you said that I distorted you argument I went back and reread your article to see if that was the case. However, it is apparent that you do believe that there is a need for ÔøΩdiversityÔøΩ in the blogosphere. I was not distorting your argument; I was just reacting to it.

Do you really believe that ideas are limited by race and gender? Do you believe that women, minorities and white men are incapable of having the same views on the issues of the day? If that is what you believe then I truly pity you. I cannot think of anything more racist and bigoted than to believe that to be the case. If you believe that men think different that woman (didnÔøΩt Larry Summers get in trouble for that), that whites think differently than blacks, that each ethnic group has its own truths that no one else can understand, then communication between people is impossible. Think about it for a moment. What good would it do to mandate diversity if each group has fundamentally different ideas. We could talk to one another, but we would not be able to understand each other words.

I could go on, but I doubt if I could make you understand why you are wrong. However, the following also needs to be said. Even though I am a white male, what makes you think that I communicate on the Internet only with other white males? The idea of me choosing whom I read and respond to based solely on their race and gender is truly preposterous. I can assure you that the blogs I frequent are quite diverse. But that is simply an artifact of what they say and not who they are. I communicate with those who believe in classic Liberalism (or if you prefer atavistic conservatism), and surprise, surprise that includes all types of people.

I look forward to your response.

Regards,

Richard

On Monday, March 14, 2005, at 12:19 PM, Levy, Steven wrote:

Don’t mind that you make fun of me, but since you distort my argument so much, it doesn’t make sense. I thought Keith Jenkins’ points on how the MSM worked at diversity were quite salient. I suppose the “what if white males like to read other white males” point could have been one used against opening up the MSM to new voices. But those of us who work in newsrooms of today know that if such thinking predominated our publications would be less than they are now. Thanks for writing, Steven

—–Original Message—–

From: Richard Nieporent [mailto:nieporent@comcast.net]

Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 9:28 PM

To: steven.levy@newsweek.com

Subject: Blogging Beyond the Men’s Club

Steve,

I think we should get Congress to pass a law requiring that everybody

must read a blog written by either a black, a women, a gay, or a

non-American or preferably all of the above. We can monitor the traffic

from everyone who uses the Internet and fine or jail those individuals

who do not read blogs with the appropriate level of diversity. Clearly

the problem is caused by bloggers such as Instapundit, because unless

they link to enough sites with diversity nobody will read them. Thus,

we should also have Congress mandate that these bloggers link to sites

with diversity. Next we can check on the books that people take out of

the library to make sure that they are reading authors with enough

diversity.

Yes, Steve I am making fun of you. I really cannot believe that you

were being serious. Did it every occur to you that people read blogs

that interest them regardless of who writes them? You remember the

saying that on the Internet nobody knows that you are a dog. It is what

you say, and not who you are that counts. And if it turns out that a

preponderance of males tend to read other males what is the problem?

Are you going to get the thought police after them?

Okay, please level with me. The real purpose of your article was to

gain readership by being controversial. I know you really can’t be that

dumb.

Regards,

Richard Nieporent

Mar 15, 2005 - 2:54 pm 29. Tully:

Go, Baldilocks, go!

Nope, no diversity in the blogosphere.

Mar 15, 2005 - 3:13 pm 30. charlotte:

Who here has seen and can really know that Wretchard isn’t Eskimo, Allah a woman, and The Diplomad Zoroastrian?

Mar 15, 2005 - 4:27 pm 31. Katherine:

Charlotte,

The picture of that fellow if fedora, it is nothing but a Photoshop job. I have on the best authority that Roger is really an Australian Aborigine who was raised in Tibetans monastery, and he worships Amon-Ra.

Mar 15, 2005 - 4:40 pm 32. neo-neocon:

Nice summary, old grouch. Methinks the MSM is feeling a bit threatened by blogs. Lately they haven’t missed an opportunity to find something to criticize. This latest one is particularly odd since, unlike the MSM, there are really no gatekeepers in the blogosphere. It really is the closest thing to a democratic journalistic meritocracy I can think of.

If for some reason there are more male than female political bloggers, it’s because more males want to blog about politics. If for some reason the male bloggers get more traffic, it’s because more people want to read them. No one’s standing over anybody’s shoulder, forcing them to click only on blogs written by men.

And who does that much thinking about the gender of a blog writer, anyway? It’s not like we’re seeing them on TV. That’s why they can wear their pajamas; no one’s looking (although, personally, being a little more formal, I tend to favor a nice broken-in pair of unmatched sweats).

A few more thoughts on the subject here.

Mar 15, 2005 - 4:56 pm 33. Kevin P:

Roger:

It is so sad how ignorant the old media is about the blogosphere. Levy challenges the blogosphere to self organize and produce diversity. He doesn’t understand that this isn’t Kinsley vs. Estrich. The only reason Estrich feels the need to organize a revolt against Kinsley is because he is the gatekeeper of the printing press of the LA Times. There is no Kinsley in the blogosphere. If I want something to appear in the Times I have to get approved by the owners and editors of the ink and the press. If I want to get into the blogosphere I can do it any time I want.If I am good I will get readers. If I stink I won’t.Good writing and a little marketting skill is all it takes. The blogosphere is far more open to new writers and ideas then the MSM ever could be.How often does the LA Times refer it’s readers to 5 or 10 other publications in a single day. The blogs do it constantly. How many newspapers has the LA Times inspired in the last decade? Bloggers do it constantly. Hugh Hewitt and our host tell people to start blogs all the time. If their good they will give them a tip of the fedora and give them a boost. Can you ever imagine the LA Times telling someone to open a paper to compete against them and then running their articles to help them build circulation. Of course not. Levy is thinking in MSM terms and trying to force the round blog into the square old media form.As the blogosphere grows more people will create blogs and the fact that they are women, black, brown, religous,ugly or beautiful will have nothing to do with whether they prosper or fail. Talent will be the factor.Meritocracy and Freedom are beautifull and they reign supreme in the blogs.

Mar 15, 2005 - 5:03 pm 34. Old Gunny:

Eventually it will dawn on all of the old media types that the only way thay can win/beat/compete with blogs is through legislation. The Mcain Fiengold flap is just the beginning. Keep a weather eye on all of “them”. They mean you no good.

Mar 15, 2005 - 5:14 pm 35. charlotte:

This is just silly. There are a lot of good “women” blogs, such as Malkin, Melanie Phillip’s Diary… er, ReginaLSimon, Little Green Barbiedolls, Intuitionline, Bellemont Club, DEBBIEfile, uh, LILACS, Iowalark, Martha Steyn, Chicago Girlz, Carbo Wisdom, oh, and of course Tam Blair and Glenda Reynolds.com.

Mar 15, 2005 - 5:58 pm 36. Rick Ballard:

You forgot ‘Winds of Polite Disagreement’.

Mar 15, 2005 - 6:30 pm 37. charlotte:

How could I have forgotten that one, Rick? Good to know you read our blogs.

And then there’s JustOneMinute, Honey.

Mar 15, 2005 - 6:59 pm 38. Rick Ballard:

Of course I read them, Charlotte. Perhaps a little less since Stephanie Den Beste retired but Daiquiri Pundit and One Hand Dusting are quite good, too.

Mar 15, 2005 - 7:23 pm 39. Katherine:

Charlotte,

I think it is time to get those domains registered. Little Green Barbiedolls is my favorite.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:08 pm 40. charlotte:

EURSOC Goes in the Hamper.com

Rick, for a white/black/brown/yellow/red/green? man of unknown creed, you’re amazingly in touch with your gender-diverse side. Still, vodka’s so much better than daiquiris, especially while dusting.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:14 pm 41. charlotte:

Katherine,

Can you explain why they’d be green? Maybe from bad fish dinner dates with Ken?

It’s not enough we’re supposed to be offended by dead white males in history and lit studies; now live white males in the infinity of the blogosphere are hogging way too much of the infinity, or so says an MSM typical white male (look how young he looks on his website!)

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:48 pm 42. Katherine:

Charlotte,

Out of the colors listed, I think you can safely assume that Rick is neither red nor green.

Mar 15, 2005 - 8:49 pm 43. Rick Ballard:

Charlotte,

Just a standard issue Burkean WASP. I am very much in tune with my feminine side, though. I find one has to be in order to give it proper instruction.

Oink, oink, oink

8^)

Mar 15, 2005 - 9:12 pm 44. Katherine:

Charlotte,

They are green because the are so attuned with Gaia that they photosynthesize their food and use chlorophyll for that, or they are mean little dolls, green with envy over what other little dolls have and they donít.

Mar 15, 2005 - 9:16 pm 45. Katherine:

Or, Charlotte, and that website that you linked to? It is so good that the expression ìgag me with a spoonî surfaced couple of treads before. Comes in handy. Ugh!

Mar 15, 2005 - 9:18 pm 46. Brown Line:

What a silly, dull article. What a shame that a tree died to print it. If the MSM thinks that they can continue to coax four bits daily out of peoples’ pockets for this caliber of dreck, they’re in for a rude shock.

Mar 16, 2005 - 4:45 am 47. Oyster:

What’s so cool about diversity in the MSM when everything they say is pre-written; largely by white males? What difference does it make to me if a black woman or a white man tells me about a murder in LA or that the Dow is up? That’s diversity? Pah. It’s just a different face saying what someone else told them to say.

Old Grouch hit the nail on the head.

Mar 16, 2005 - 5:25 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: