The numbers are in, and BRO saw nearly 2 million visits in 2008. Yes, you helped to make us one of the fastest-growing websites in the area, and we thank you. With knowledge, however, comes change. We are putting all of our energies into our website, while bidding a fond farewell to the print version of Buffalo Rising.
View image
Here's what we know:
- Our website is daily; our magazine is monthly.
- Our website covers news; our magazine covers features that later go up on the website.
- Our website allows us to know what you read and what you like; our magazine doesn't allow us to see what you read.
- Our website is available to anyone in the world with a computer and interest in Buffalo; our magazine is in local coffee shops and stores.
- Our website allows readers to comment and opens up whole new community discussions about where we live; our magazine is nice to read when you're alone.
- Our website creates no waste.
On that note, schools and organizations who like to use BRM as a teaching or promotional tool should drop by for back issues now because we won't be printing any more, effective immediately.
Even though we're heartened by the few people we run into each week who tell us they love the magazine (and we do too), it's hard to make a case for it when the website is so highly visited, and those visits are documented.
You, the faithful, have had a chance to check out the new site for a month now. It has more information channels and new features - including giving users the ability to post directly to events. And soon, we'll have restaurant and retail guides. We can make everyone - advertisers, readers and writers - happier right here. Who could ask for anything more?
BRO, good move.
How about instituting something similar to Yelp's compliment feature so that users can react to comments posted by readers?
Will BRO finally have a posted policy on the website regarding how it will address hateful comments posted by a few, including the infamous Chris69/Buffaloweiner/Buffalo21stcentury/Queencity? You folks have remained quite silent on this important aspect of the website.
I do not agree with everything that Chris69/L or any of his other aliases posts, but he does have some valid points and makes the comments more interesting at times. It is unfortunate that so many people would like to live in a sterile environment where things that they find objectionable are censored or deleted by those who feel that they hold the majority opinion or are the gatekeepers of morality and righteousness.
I do not agree with censorship of opinions just because I do not agree with them, especially when they barely touch on the topic. I have yet to see Chris69 use truly offensive remarks or make comments that could be truly construed as hateful. I think that too many people are just overly sensitive. Too many people wish that prejudice will go away through censorship, but fail to see their own prejudice in the matter.
I found the site to be a lot more enjoyable when we had a variety of opinions and comments on most of the posts.
Whynot, a variety of opinions is important, but if that variety includes discriminatory language it says little about the quality of the discourse. Buffaloweiner has exhibited a long pattern of anti-semitism and many of his vile comments were quickly deleted under the old BRO format, as were the comments of a few others.
Yelp has a Terms of Service clause with one point stating that the user agrees not to 'use the Site to promote bigotry or discrimination against protected classes'. Yelp users who have displayed a pattern of negative behavior have been banned from that website. Weiner is not simply an Eric Cartman cartoon character. Tolerating a subtle, but no less clear, employment of racist, homophobic and anti-semitic language should not be the burden of the user in a public forum.
Paul - I understand where you are coming from, the concern here is that we continue to move the line of what is considered inflammatory , bigoted, or salacious comments to the point that people are unable to express their viewpoints on potentially sensitive issues. We are already past the point of discussing religion, race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disabilities, and many other topics in an open or honest manner, unless you are part of one of the protected classes, then it is ok to discuss as needed.
I am really interested to see how most pundits, comedians, and commentators skate around Barack Obama's race or Hillary Clinton's gender. It is completely acceptable to make his race an issue if you are African American, but unacceptable if you are of another ethnicity or color. I listen to the Russ Joyner morning show on WBLK every morning and they continuously mention the importance of this election to black americans in some of the most unflattering or seemingly biased ways. Do you think that the same critique of Obama and the impact of his Presidency would be as accepted if it was coming from Howard Stern or Opie and Anthony? How about a comment about his race and the new acceptance of African Americans made by John Stewart? Could he make that comment without it being taken out of context and being branded a racist?
The point here is that we need to be careful in this overly sensitive and ultra-PC society. At some point we will lose the choice to talk openly about many topics, as more and more special interest groups try their best to become the next protected class. If you would like an example, then take a look at the current legislation that would like to provide legal protection to undocumented aliens to ensure that their civil and human rights are preserved by solidifying their status as class that requires protection against persecution.
For those who are unfamiliar, a protected class is a group of people with similar characteristics that have legal rights superior to those not in a protected class, and upon whom actions deemed to be offensive to the class are criminalized in a special way with greater penalty than when such acts are inflicted on non class victims.
Now don't get me wrong, I believe in the protection of civil rights and the extension of certain laws to ensure that rights are preserved for groups that are historically discriminated against. I believe that protections are required for most protected classes, especially homosexual and GLBT persons, persons of color, and various nations of origins, disabilities, etc. That said, I also believe that we should preserve our rights to free speech, free press, and intelligent discourse that could educate the less informed or more ignorant among us.
I am not into the overly or overtly Orwellian ideals that only certain discussions or topics are acceptable and the rest should be controlled. That is just my opinion, and I could be wrong.
Whynot, I appreciate the breadth and detail of your comments -- and the time it took you to make your points. I accept that there are pockets of exaggerated sensitivity to political correctness and I also accept that comedians, such as Stern, thrive on taboo issues in their work.
Weiner's comments -- and I don't mean to single him out, but he has been the classic example by means of consistency on BRO -- are not the work of a performer taking pleasure in pushing the envelope to achieve a payoff. No, he has demonstrated strong belief in these warped views and purposely threads many of his sentences with clear discriminatory remarks meant to lay blame based on religion, color and lifestyle. To tolerate this is to open the door further for more vitriolic statements and BRO's continuing silence is puzzling.
This is my opinion, too, and, perhaps, others will disagree; but, it remains an important issue for me. Again, I appreciate the thoughts of your comments. Thank you.
Paul - I am not advocating for hatefulness, prejudice, or salacious speech; however I am saying that it is not my place to push my perspective and values on others for the simple fact that their comments or beliefs do not align with mine.
Education and enlightenment is the answer to ignorance, not oppression and censorship. I know that we do not want to hear or read comments that we find objectionable, but they exist and to they are valid to the person who is sharing them with us. I spent most of my life hearing negative comments about my sexuality, and they hurt; however I have become a better person at deflecting and challenging these comments as a result of hearing them. I have been able to openly discuss other people's beliefs in my sexuality and how / why they were formed, and that is powerful.
Do we understand where Buffaloweiner is coming from? Do we understand what is driving his ignorance or hatred? I don't, but I would love to find out so we can address that and hopefully bring a sense of balance to his one sided diatribes.
Political correctness doesn't exist in small pockets, it is a common part of our daily lives, from television programming to educational curricula to just about every form of mass media that exists today. I am not saying that this is a bad thing, because it is not, but it was born from the same system that we hope to repress today. I hope that we do not leave the expression of a contrarian opinion only to the performance artists who have the license to push the envelope, because most Americans just won't get it. Staving off ignorance should be as much an every day part of life as political correctness, but I do not believe that it should be done at the expense of free speech.