A Stitch in Haste

Wall Street Journal editor Dan Henninger pens yet another “guys in pajamas” screed against blogs:

The human species has spent several hundred thousand years sorting through which emotions and marginal neuroses to keep under control and which to release. Now, with a keyboard, people overnight are “free” to unburden and unhinge themselves continuously and exponentially. One researcher quotes the entry-page of a teenage girl’s blog: “You are now entering my world. My pain. My mind. My thoughts. My emotions. Enter with caution and an open mind.”

The power of the Web is obvious and undeniable. We diminish it at our peril. But what if the most potent social effect to spread outward from the Internet turns out to be disinhibition, the breaking down of personal restraints and the endless elevation of oneself? It may be already.

His example of a disinhibited, self-elevating, anti-social personal website: The Becker-Posner Blog. Oh wait, that’s his gratuitous “exception proves the rule” counter-example. (Of course, in reality sometimes the exception really does disprove the rule. But let’s put that aside.)

No, Henninger’s example of anti-social Internet pathology is MySpace. The fact that MySpace pages are not blogs is, apparently, besides the point.

As is besides the point the fact that most such pages are crafted by youths, who have never been known for their inhibitions.

And as is besides the point the fact that people “disinhibited” themselves long before the Internet. People kept diaries, people made home movies. People confessed to their priests. People joined clandestine clubs.

And finally besides the point is, most importantly, the fact that Henninger’s ideal alternative is, apparently, no alternative at all — just shut up and keep your neuroses to yourself, for the greater good of society.

This is, of course, utter nonsense.

If keeping a blog or a MySpace page is a therapeutic release, then why shouldn’t we encourage it? Because it offends Henninger’s sensibilities? Who is the one committing an “endless elevation of self” here?

Since when is it wrong, online or otherwise, to commisserate with another soul, to encourage catharsis, to find another person intriguing, to learn that — no matter what makes you you — that there are people out there just like you?

Not every entry on a blog is a narcissistic preening or emotional purging. Not every visit to someone else’s personal website is prurient voyeurism.

From Dan Rather to Dan Henninger, it’s the same old MSM nonsense: “That which is not us is inferior, unhealthy and possibly even dangerous…”

Remind me again who needs a healthy dose of inhibition?

More thoughts from PoliBlog, Unqualified Offerings.

—

Another Henningerism:

Intense language … used to be confined to construction sites and corner bars. Now it is normal discourse on Web sites, the most popular forums for political discussion. Much of this is new. Politics is a social endeavor. The Web is nothing if not “social.” But the blogosphere is also the product not of people meeting, but venting alone at a keyboard with all the uninhibited, bat-out-of-hell hyperbole of thinking, suggestion and expression that this new technology seems to release.

“Bat-out-hell hyperbole”? Like these snippets from some of today’s Townhall columnists, all of whom are conservatives and none of whom are “disinhibited” bloggers:

Mike S. Adams: “It ain’t over ’til the fat lesbian sings.”

Brent Bozell: “Viacom used to be the scum of the Earth, parading around and accept awards from the ACLU for their “courageous” programming. … These people are still the scum of the Earth, but now they can’t in any way claim that they’re courageous when it comes to controversy. They’re hypocrites and cowards of the most odious rank.”

David Limbaugh“You have to be naive not to recognize that the radical homosexual lobby is pushing its lifestyle on American society and using intimidation tactics…”

I repeat: Who needs a healthy dose of inhibition here?