In a recent editorial in the LGBT Weekly, Stampp Corbin, the publisher, skewers one of his regular columnists for recent statements made by Nicole Ramirez. While I have been on the chew toy end of the Nicole puppy drivel, the recent public “spanking” by the publisher certainly made me cringe.
Though I am no fan of Nicole’s column and lack of research, I guess I was always taught to correct and guide in a private setting. I have never been a fan of the strategy of public humiliation and horrific embarrassment.
For years, Nicole [Murray] Ramirez has enjoyed a liberal leash to attack and question the integrity of others in the community. The publisher defended the column since he invited Ramirez to write and began publishing Nicole’s articles.
Regularly claiming a right to provide a forum of conversation, I believe it became a hope that this type of columnist would improve distribution. I only can surmise that Mr. Corbin secretly enjoyed the animosity it created and the hurt it fomented. I certainly read comments from engaged community leaders on Facebook that were increasing after recent commentary by Ramirez. Only with the recent pro-Republican and anti-[Susan]Atkins comments did he consider it threatened the viability of his paper, or rather him, personally.
The article was strong. The “he is simply crazy” kind of victimized put-down in a public forum, the kind of editorial I guess I should expect. The publisher could have easily stopped publishing Nicole’s articles and offered up a public yet humble apology to those over the years who have been maligned. Yet, he did not.
Instead, without any previous known corrective action or community-engaged process other than to suggest those maligned comment in a letter to the editor, Stampp Corbin smears and lampoons Nicole [Murray] Ramirez, thus continuing to pander to the basest form of communication in our community: public humiliation.
Further, Stampp Corbin does not take any responsibility for the commentary posted for years in his paper — while admitting in public forums that his editors actually have edited Nicole’s published commentary — much less have a responsible process of researching the claims written and published.
I, for one, have never relished Nicole’s columns, especially when being the subject being diced. Yet, editorial slicing and dicing of Nicole for the entire community to review is the same kind of pandering. Perhaps in Corbin’s wise judgment, it needed to be in print, just as Nicole’s judgments have been.
I guess I just tend a little further toward mercy, grace, and forgiveness. I feel harsh attacks and overwhelming public disgraces aren’t actions to take when one hopes to continue future interactions of positive worth.
I have valued the volunteer contributions and leadership efforts of both Stampp Corbin and Nicole [Murray] Ramirez. I do not always agree with the efforts of others in the community, but I do support their sacrifice and contributions for others. I do not value the way this paper has allowed communication or smearing of character to run amok.
I hope that the community will learn something about how we should engage and communicate with each other about our differences. I also hope we learn that when you start to throw hand grenades, you sometimes forget that you might already be in a minefield.
Either way, it seems like war and you might not know whom you will lose — or learn how you have been injured — until it’s too late. And, frankly, that is not a fun way to build community.