April 25, 2024

Ted Williams, Audubon Columnist, Is Reinstated

On March 15, the National Audubon Society suspended a longtime magazine columnist and bird lover after he wrote a column for another publication identifying Tylenol as an effective poison for feral cats. After a 10-day dispute that drew in parts of the journalism and wildlife communities, the society on Tuesday reinstated Ted Williams, a freelance writer for the society for the last 33 years, and said that his column would return in the magazine’s July-August issue.

David Yarnold, president and chief executive of the National Audubon Society, announced in a statement that the society did not find a “larger pattern of missteps that would warrant further disciplinary action.” Mr. Williams apologized on Audubon’s Web site on Tuesday, calling his reference to Tylenol “irresponsible.”

His original column, which ran in The Orlando Sentinel, thrust Mr. Williams directly into the long-simmering feud between bird lovers and cat lovers. Cats, both domesticated and feral, have been identified as the chief threat to birds: a recent analysis from the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute and the Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that cats kill an average of 2.4 billion birds in the continental United States every year.

Mr. Yarnold said Mr. Williams’s comments in his column did not reflect the views of the Audubon Society.

“We absolutely reject the notion of individuals poisoning cats or treating cats in any inhumane way,” Mr. Yarnold said.

The controversy began on March 14 when The Orlando Sentinel published an online column by Mr. Williams describing the dangers of feral cats and criticizing the “trap, neuter and return” approach used to try to improve their lives and reduce their number. Mr. Williams detailed how many diseases are spread by feral cats and how they have killed billions of birds each year.

He argued that groups should instead consider a “trap and euthanize” approach. He said using over-the-counter medications, including Tylenol, would be a humane way to kill cats. He cited his reporting for Audubon Magazine to bolster his arguments.

It didn’t take long for the cat community to register its outrage. The editorial quickly drew 137 comments on The Sentinel’s Web site. But the biggest reaction came from the Alley Cat Allies, a national advocacy group on cat management, which on March 15 encouraged its members to contact the Audubon Society. The group said its members voiced their concerns in 33,420 e-mails or posts on social media sites.

The next day the Audubon Society issued a statement saying it had put Mr. Williams on probation. The society also said that while cats were still “a leading cause of bird deaths,” it did not endorse Mr. Williams’s suggestions. “Backyard poisoning isn’t the answer and we want to make it absolutely clear we don’t support that idea,” it said.

The conflict did not fade. On Friday, Mike Lafferty, opinions editor at The Orlando Sentinel, wrote, “You can find bomb-building plans on the Internet, but you won’t find them on The Orlando Sentinel’s Web site. Neither should you find specific information on which drugs make effective feral cat poisons.”

Throughout the debate, members of the journalism community defended Mr. Williams and cited his long career reporting on these subjects.

“The name Ted Williams evokes more than a famous baseball player. It identifies arguably the finest and most effective wildlife investigative reporter and journalist America has ever known,” David Peterson wrote in an article in The Huffington Post.

In his statement on Tuesday, Mr. Williams apologized for hurting the reputation of Audubon and emphasized that he worked as a freelancer. He said he regretted committing “bad journalism” but his actions stemmed from an enthusiasm he shared with many Audubon members.

“Like you, I am passionate about protecting birds,” said Mr. Williams. “I let my passion get the best of me, calling into question the scientific credibility of Audubon and squandering some of my own.”

The news of Mr. Williams’s reinstatement further upset some cat supporters.

“Alley Cat Allies is stunned,” said Becky Robinson, the group’s president. “By reinstating him so soon after this incident, it’s clear that the National Audubon Society is not understanding and grasping the gravity of the issue.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/business/media/ted-williams-audubon-columnist-is-reinstated.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bits Blog: One on One: Cole Stryker, Author of ‘Epic Win for Anonymous’

Cole Stryker, author of Epic Win for Anonymous.Wesley Stringer Cole Stryker, author of “Epic Win for Anonymous.”

Cole Stryker, a freelance writer and media consultant living in New York, spent years digging into Internet culture and communities, both as a participant and as a blogger covering viral phenomena. He’s the author of a new book called “Epic Win for Anonymous: How 4chan’s Army Conquered the Web.” He discussed with me what it’s like exploring the seedy underbelly of the Internet, the rise of Anonymous, and why it and 4chan, widely considered one of the darkest and most subversive corners of the Internet, may be one of the most important and influential creations to emerge from the modern Web.

How did you decide to write about 4chan?

I was writing about Internet culture for Urlesque last year when Anonymous targeted an 11-year-old girl named Jessi Slaughter and found out where she lived, posted her contact info online and made her life miserable. It became a viral phenomenon and I was covering it. A friend of a friend introduced me to a literary agent and I pitched her an idea about this community where a lot of these antisocial movements are cultivated.

I first became interested in 4chan in 2007 when my friends were passing around links that often led me back to 4chan. It was a repository for anything bizarre or subversively hilarious that didn’t have a place elsewhere on the Web. Anonymous kicked things into high gear over last year and especially this summer and it was the main reason I was able to score a publishing deal because it was becoming a big deal at the time.

How did you gain access and trust of the community?

I talked to people who were hanging out on 4chan and I would start threads and ask questions. There were a lot of different reactions. People weren’t angry the book was being made but they would say they couldn’t wait to download it illegally. I don’t know if that was meant to hurt my feelings or what. But there is this insular culture that the press had no idea about and no interest in until this summer.

I think the animosity comes from that they felt they had a cool secret club and I’m explaining all their lingo and secret codes. It’s like being into an indie rock band and it signs to a major label and then you get a bunch of tween girls singing their songs and claiming they are superfans. It feels like it’s not special anymore and you’ve lost part of your identity.

How does 4chan and Anonymous choose its targets?

It started off with attacking individuals. Most of the time it’s a power play. A huge community of social misfits that feel like they own the Internet and it was their refuge when society rejected them. When they feel like an idiot is encroaching on their territory or who is way out of bounds, they feel like it’s their duty to put that person in their place with what they call their “life-ruining tactics.”

The first moral crusade was the pedo-baiting tactics. They would look for pedophiles by posing as underage girls and then getting their contact info and turning them over to authorities. That was [Anonymous’] first righteous indignation and a moral victory. Up until then it had been psychopathic attacks on individuals.

The big turning point for Anonymous was the Scientology attacks. That changed the face of Anon in two ways. One, it was the first time they were appearing in public. Two, they were going after a mass entity. That defined them from 2007 and led the way for going after MasterCard and other big companies. It was a paradigm shift.

Are you finding yourself the target of Anonymous because of the book?

Yes, but on a very shallow level. They haven’t pulled anything off that’s given me pause. They signed me up for some magazines. They signed me up for an Indian matrimonial site. It’s a minor, minor annoyance and nothing I would be fearful about. I haven’t even gotten any pizzas delivered and I’m kind of disappointed about that. Maybe I’m speaking too soon, though.

In the book you point out that 4chan wasn’t always anchored on the premise of anonymity. Why and when do you think that shifted?

It’s important to remember that 4chan was originally intended to be a place for anime geeks to talk about anime with each other. It wasn’t always a hellhole of anti-social behavior. It was a combination of people getting braver about posting stranger and more extreme content on 4chan and they wanted to be anonymous. It doesn’t explain why it was the default. I think when you’re allowed to have a name, it takes the focus away from the content itself and puts the focus on you as the creator of that content. They wanted to get rid of that egoism that comes with that.

You talk in the book quite a bit about the importance of 4chan in shaping the online communities and the culture of the Web. Can you elaborate on that, especially as big companies like Google, Facebook and Apple become more pervasive and knowledgeable about the people using their services?

I’m not going to make the argument that the social dissidents are hanging out or sharing info on 4chan, but I see it more as a symbolic win for anonymity. It’s not a place where people under repressive governments are organizing but it’s still important for it to be around because of freedom of speech.

There needs to be a place for people to be horrible as well as wildly creative. I’ve seen threads where homosexual kids are asking questions and saying things like if my parents found out, they’d kill me. Randi Zuckerberg [Mark Zuckerberg’s sister] is always saying we should abolish anonymity on the Web. I don’t think she’s taking that into account, that there might be some things you could never talk about on Facebook. It allows people to do things that they would never do in real life and be who they really want to be. That was the promise of the Web in the beginning and it’s heartening for there to still be a place for it.

Since you finished the book, Anonymous has become a household name. Do you think they’re the future of activism and civil disobedience or Web-based pranksterism that will blow over as soon as the world and Web adjusts to the tactics?

I think it’s a little of both. Anonymous serves as an inoculation to their tactics. If a real hacker group wanted to go after MasterCard, they’d break in, steal millions of dollars worth of data, then leave and you’d never know. Anonymous, on the other hand, tends to congratulate itself on Twitter seconds after a breach and doesn’t really do very much damage. I think companies will adapt to their tactics and people will get better about improving their passwords.

But I think it will have a lasting effect. The power of Anonymous to generate media attention to a certain idea is way more powerful than their actual attacks. I think people will look back on the Anonymous era and see it more than just a way to generate interest and outrage around a certain social phenomenon or social injustice than the hacks that they are currently known for.

How has the media attention impacted or changed the culture of 4chan?

It’s definitely changed Anonymous. It’s become so large that they’re barely recruiting on 4chan for major operations. The media attention has encouraged them to go after more lofty goals. 4chan has grown definitely, but I don’t think it’s changed a lot from the media attention. People conform to the culture more than the culture conforms to them. People either think it’s repulsive and get out of there or think it’s interesting and stick around to see what they can get out of it.

Has 4chan jumped the shark? Considering all the current media attention on Anonymous and 4chan?

If anything, 4chan will go back to the way it was before the Anonymous movement blew up in 2007. I think there’s always going to be something like 4chan. It might take place at a different URL. But there’s always going to be interest in a place where anything can happen.

4chan is home to the type of content that no other venue is designed to hold. People post stuff like “I’m on my phone and I just broke into my neighbor’s house. What do I do?” It’s not storytelling, its not like reality TV. It’s a new kind of entertainment and discussion around a real-time and collaborative thing. It’s so spontaneous because of the anonymity and the fact that nothing is archived. You never know what you’re going to get.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=40ea03e40e6ad740b2b988eb5cf5e49d