The beauty of the weblog—and the Web in general—is that anyone can have their say. If people agree, or like what you say, your site’ s popularity, in theory, grows; but the opposite is just as true.
Over the past month, many, like my own, have been mixing political views in with the regular content. The unveiling of many webloggers’ true colours has been a bizarre side-effect of the September 11 attacks.
There are those I read who I know now disagree with my own viewpoints, but I continue reading them because they still have something informative to say.
Unfortunately, one of my favourite blogs—one I visited a few times a day—has changed for the worst.
Hate or hurt?
Soon after September 11, the tone shifted from posts containing interesting links and observations about Web design to those containing thinly veiled attacks against Muslims and Arabs.
One of his comments I found so off-putting I commented on it. He promptly slapped me down, itching to argue me on it despite making it clear he wouldn’ t accept dissenting views.
Fair enough, it’ s his site.
Until today, I hadn’ t returned.
When going to the site this afternoon, I’ d hope to find his early comments were because he’ d been shaken-up by the events. Instead, I found content which made those initial postings seem tame.
I debated on naming the weblog in question, but in the end I choose silence.
This is not typical for me. Though I believe in free speech, freedom of expression, I also believe it is wrong to lie and promote—no matter how veiled—hate.
But by naming his weblog, I’ ll have released the meme. Even without a link to the site, it would be a Google search away.
Web sites thrive of traffic, without it, the sites—and the memes they promote—can’ t survive and I am unwilling to help sustain his little site and ideas it breeds anymore.