Ave Marie ... Claire: Blogger Etiquette

The English translation of Franz Schubert's Ave Maria has the line, "Thou canst save amid despair." 

This might be advice I'd share with Maura Kelly, blogger of Marie Claire's "A Year of Living Flirtatiously," who's likely in the middle of despair for having written an incendiary column that uses less-than-pretty language to discuss overweight individuals. People (2,288 commenters to be precise) are attacking her for zingers like, "I'd be grossed out if I had to watch two characters with rolls and rolls of fat kissing each other" and "I find it aesthetically displeasing to watch a very, very fat person simply walk across a room -- just like I'd find it distressing if I saw a very drunk person stumbling across a bar or a heroin addict slumping in a chair." (Awkwardly, she exposed her sloppiness as a writer when she misspelled 'heroin' as 'heroine' in her post).

Here's Kelly's post this week on 'Should "Fatties" Get a Room (Even on TV?)." 

One of the first rules in journalism was learning how to compare apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Whereas Kelly compares apples to bananas when she likens the appearance of overweight individuals to that of heroin users. {insert awkward cough} She writes, "Anorexia is sick, but at least some slim models are simply naturally skinny." {eye roll} Overlooking the fact many of those models starve/bulimic themselves, did she not realize genetics are to blame for making Kate Moss as well as Oprah? Kelly misses the application of this lesson entirely (and yet the girl went to Dartmouth).

There is nothing illegal about writing trite ramble and calling it "professional," but this is a column about etiquette and social graces. If I were a blogger for a major Hearst pub, I'd have the sense to first, avoid egregious misspellings {shudder}, and two, use a filter before expressing myself on a contentious topic, like weight, which might personally and deeply affect a lot of individuals. When expressing an opinion--showing social grace and consideration neither adds nor detracts from the freedom of an opinion. There's always a hundred ways to say the same thing.

Last note. In her column, Kelly's beef was with the personal appearance of "fatties" being represented on TV (Should "fatties" Get a Room, Even on TV), insomuch she inferred a "displeasing" quality about viewing them on a big screen. For argument's sake, let's compare apples to apples. I wonder what Kelly would opine on personal appearances depicted by Snookie, Speidi and Octoman? If networks are willing to put the likes of those individuals on TV, why is there tremendous harm in broadcasting "Mike & Molly" whose characters are enrolled in Overeaters Anonymous. In time, I'm sure Kelly "canst save amid despair," since everyone's etiquette can falter at times.

"Remember you always have a choice: tact or react,
Every peacemaker uses the wisdom of diplomacy,
Because words when spoken right make men see" 

-- Tim Pickl