Apparently "Sloppiness" is ok bro...

The LinkedIn article, "How Spelling Mistakes and Bad E-mail Etiquette Can Help You Get Ahead" by Kevin Roose, of  New York Magazine contradicts anything anyone in the journalism field has ever said about being professional and makes me want to relinquish my major. The great bulk of professional people say to be more formal in communicating with people whom they do not know: you have to remember first impressions. All eyes are on you and any mistake in an email or letter can cause a loss in credibility.

Everybody makes mistakes in emails and letters, but encouraging or cute-ifying them as it seems in the article, should really have no foot in the professional world of people reminiscent of the Edwardian bankers in “Mary Poppins,” crystal chandeliers and marble walls.

With the Zuckerberg example, if someone gets a time-sensitive email or message from anyone, be it a CEO or secretary, the probability of a more "informal" response is higher as compared to something like a cover letter that should be reviewed and edited. Also, you need to take into consideration how that person is responding.

 Is it an iPhone, PC, or laptop? That will make a difference on the level of “formality” on how one responds. Hand-held devices are more informal, therefore a more informal response. The great masses aren’t going to give a polished equivalent of a papal bull in a text message. Reply and we move on our way. What gets me is last names in reply emails from people who have time to read cover letters and resumes.

Whereas, in an email sent via pc or laptop by organization, that’s a whole different ball game on formality. There are people whom I email on a regular basis and screw up Wiesman, (pronounced Weez-man, just like the band Weezer) not the more common, WEISSman or WEISSman (pronounced Wise-man). (Wies- comes from German "Wiese" meaning meadow, "Weiss"- means white or smart in German. Man- means "one" but not numerically.) There’s your German lesson for the day.

Sometimes it's forgivable, if I know the person. Whereas, if it's a reply from a firm, company or job recruiter, who has time to read my resume and LinkedIn et.al., the misspelling of my last name just goes to show they didn't take the time to read how my last name is spelled or first.

 Then, to be bluntly honest folks, I think less of the organization or company if someone gets my name wrong. “Wiesman” might be a challenge for hr departments (even in Wisconsin, where there is a high German/Polish population) it seems, but at least it's not "Włotrzewiszczykowycki."

Headlines and Ethics: When is Too Far?

The Stark Family

Recently, the New York Post’s lead story about a Hasidic man in shtreimel and bekishe with the headline reading “Who didn’t want him dead?” on the left-hand side shocked people throughout New York City and beyond. It is shocking because of what happened and also the headline. As a graduate from UW-Oshkosh’s journalism department, and religious studies minor who studied the history of Hasidim, I see the headline as what it really is – tasteless. That’s right folks, tasteless. And here’s why.

We must realize it was shocking in and of itself that a man, a father, a faithful member of a religious community was found murdered in such a barbaric, uncivilized manner. It is terrible to think a person, made by the Almighty would have to suffer such a heartless death. To make matters worse, the Post added insult to injury to a grieving family, by defaming his name and reducing him to a “slumlord” and making him out to be some sort of criminal. The headline should have read: “Missing NY Property Developer Found Murdered.” That’s a lot for a grieving family and community to bear, regardless of who it is, but at least there is respect for the deceased. But let us ask ourselves, should a murder of a person, no matter whom, be a front page story? Shouldn’t there be consideration to the family and friends left behind? Has present reporting journalism lost all heart?

The current media seems to worship bad things happening to people no matter whom or where they are. It is as if nothing good happens in the media and we wonder why most of the Western world is all drugged on antidepressants. Hardly anything charitable, community-building or praiseworthy seems to make it to be a front-page headline. From terrorist attacks in Iraqi cities that kill hundreds of people, to devastating natural events that leave people homeless to murders, the media seems to praise atrocities. What if your mother or relative was killed in a terrorist attack, your neighbor left homeless and hungry after a tornado, or in this case, what if your father or husband was found brutally murdered? How would a newspaper reporter feel if something bad like that happened to a loved one and make front-page news? Is there no heart for families or the deceased?

Therefore, do journalists these days not see the whole story? After reading the article I came (as did many others), that it was obviously one-sided. The article prattled about what “sources” – many who apparently have no names - said about Stark. Here was a man who devoted his life to faith, family and friends. Do journalists not understand the people they write about have emotions, relatives, and a community or do journalists think the people whom they write about are just soulless-objects like doors, nails, and bricks? I suggest the NY Post along with all other news outlets take into account the “human side” of a tragedy, not just treating people as if they are objects to be studied. The NY Post, seems to not discuss something rather important in a murder case – the murderers. Until we know who murdered Menachem Stark, killers are on the loose. I know these days of mourning will be tough, I bid his family all the best during these times, yet “Stark” as it comes from German, means “strong” - and I know they will be.

Menachem Stark

 Eternal be his memory.