why i really don’t like snark
I don’t usually comment on nasty stuff in the media. It’s usually best left to fester without further stoking. But I feel compelled this time. Because it’s an example of something that’s been bothering me for ages.
Snark. I really don’t like it. Gawker started this bitchy style of commentary. Perez Hilton perfected it. And bloggers and tweeters have tried to emulate it. 
Snark has become a “voice” that many people find comfortable to slip into. It’s easy to replicate. Just look down your nose and spew forth. It’s mistaken for critical thinking. It’s not. Critical thinking is productive. Snark separates you from me. It creates distance, which is destructive. It makes none of us happy. It’s human behaviour at it’s most base and fearful. Which is so disappointing.
Snark is not hate speech. It’s more cowardly. And it attacks individuals on personal fronts. See this New York Times article on snark for more.
And note: the great writers and reviewers don’t stoop to snark. They don’t need to or wish to. Their aim is to share and connect, ultimately.
I rant, of course, following the attention Wil Anderson and Catherine Deveny’s Logie tweets have attracted. It’s just been announced Catherine’s been dumped from The Age (their words, not mine) for her contributions. Both are very talented artists. But they both spent Logies night emitting cruel comments on Twitter. It was an avalanche of snark. On Sunday night I observed it for about 15 minutes. I actually unfollowed Wil after last year’s Logies when he slaughtered Gretel Killeen by Twitter. It was horrible and unnecessary. Ditto Catherine a while back – her tweets were too aggressive. I also cancelled my Gawker subscription for the same reason. Negative energy spreads. You are who you hang around with and what you read and what you absorb.
But I was forwarded one of Wil’s:
Masterchef speech thanked “Sarah working in NSW” in other words “we sacked her”…
I wasn’t upset for myself. I quit MasterChef (I was contracted for three series) because the role was not something I wanted to continue in. And left amicably. There is no issue here. For me. And, yep, I was working that night.
No, I was upset because snark is so wrong and unhelpful and fearful and sad.
A few points:
- Andrew Lehmo tweeted this: I can’t believe reaction to @Wil_Anderson #logies tweets. can’t we laugh anymore? ps it’s twitter not sky writing. you dont have to read it.
Not true. People like Wil accumulate followers because it helps them sell their show tickets or books or whatever. All good. They work hard to attract a following. Wil has 35K+ followers. A big audience. Sure, they opt in. But they’ve been invited there… lured by his fame. They want to be part of his inner circle. It’s not like following a stranger. Wil has influence. Once in his circle, followers get tweets from Wil, whether they like them or not.
Further, Tweets hang around for ever, unlike a sky written message. And they’re passed on. And, when they come from someone influential with whom you feel you have an intimate connection with, then the message is far more potent than a message from some faceless marketing company you don’t care about.
- Some say, “it’s easy, just don’t follow him”…I don’t follow him. But cos he’s someone famous, his tweets get retweeted. And so they get thrust your way, often.
- Many have said Wil is a comedian who is allowed to say such things. I’d argue that Wil is a public figure working in an industry that is volatile, precarious, full of fragile egos and that is tough to withstand. I can tell you – TV is a vexed industry. I didn’t think it could be worse than magazines. It is. It batters even the most robust characters. And everyone in the industry knows this. We know how bad it can get. Which is why I truly think industry insiders should not drag each other down. But should actually make an effort to shift the energy. We owe it to each other.
What’s more, Wil’s attacks were personal, not professional. Most of them were about people’s appearance. Low!! When you’re in the public eye, this kind of bludgeoning is friggen hard to take. You’re already out on the furthest limb of the branch, available for all kinds of batterings. It’s one thing to be bagged for being a bad actor, or saying something dumb to a New Idea journo. It’s another to be torn down for your body weight.
- My rant too Pollyanna for you? OK, what about this: Wil should use his wit and smarts for good, not negative, bile-dredging, easy snark. It reflects 100% on him that he chooses to descend into snark when clearly he’s bright enough to buck such a rut.
- Finally, various studies have shown postiive tweets are far more effective than negative ones. They get retweeted more often. Love spreads.
Which is a nice way to end things.
That’s it.
Young Sarah,
I agree with you. It is far easier to destroy than create and whilst free speech is a given, destructive speech, with no redeeming value beyond crass entertainment, is unfair to all who it attempts to condemn. People who spend their lives in the public eye, either informing or entertaining the public are easy targets for abuse, with the abusers forgetting that their arrows are aimed at real people, with real feeling and real families. Sure there are egos involved, but anyone in the public eye deserves the respect of their peers. The term “there but for the grace of God go I” comes to mind…
Love ya work.
Mark,
Photographer and coffee drinker.
The Herald Sun!
[Reply]
Well said Sarah – twitter in the old days was a wonderful way of sharing information not condemnation. Positivity spreads positivity and we’re all human at the end of the day!
[Reply]
I like it – “Use the Force for good, Wil – don’t go over to the Dark Side!”
Not that I’m in any way making light of what happened, or your well-balanced response. I agree with you – sarcasm, or snark (is that sarcasm in under 140 characters?), is a refuge, a fallback position for the lazy thinker. It’s a shame when you hear it from people who are clearly intelligent and witty enough to raise laughs without tearing other individuals down.
There’s also a really important point I think you are making here, about being or becoming the type of people we want to see in the world (like Gandhi’s ‘be the change…”). When someone like Wil with his 35k followers (or Catherine, or anyone else) builds their humour on a culture of snark and bile, they are asking those 35k people to join them in that place, saying, in effect, ‘isn’t it cool, that we can stand and point and laugh at this person – how confronting and cutting edge we all are”.
Is that the type of world we want to be in, the type of people we want to become? I like the place you hint at; where people in your industry support each other, with a deeper understanding of the shared pressures, where the energy shifts towards becoming something greater than it is. Call me an old-fashioned idealist (some do) – call me Kamahl (nope- never get that one!) – but why do so many people have to be so unkind?
Okay. Rant over. Good post.
[Reply]
HI Sarah
He has the right to do what he does, he’s just a prick, for being so mean about it in the process, one day he’ll grow up with a bit of luck. He’s just a keyboard jockey on the web, who should know better..
cheers
pete
[Reply]
Thanks Sarah. Agree- a fine line between snark & wit, but at the end of it, anything that has the potential to hurt someone else? well, it is just nasty schoolyard stuff.
[Reply]
Well said Sarah. Wil’s always had a nasty streak and I think he confuses humour with being a smart arse. Perhaps he’ll grow up one day.
[Reply]
I like Pollyanna and have done so from when I was a kid.
[Reply]
Comedians have a right to say what they want, they have a right to make jokes about whatever they want but they have to accept that they will be judged accordingly. It’s time for them to to take these jokes back to the stand up rooms where it’s safe and where they belong.
Sarah you are so right about performers supporting each other in a tough industry. It’s hard enough without being taken down by your peers. Bravo
[Reply]
nice peice sarah. I have always found Will Anderson to be so nasty and sarcastic, and just not funny. he thinks he is better than others. If someone tweeted or said something nasty and bitchy about him, he would fire back at something worse.. which says it all really.
[Reply]
Hi Sarah,
I’ve been directed here by someone on Mia Freedman’s site and I have to say, I really like the look, the feel, and more importantly, the content (at least what I’ve seen of it so far). It’s great to have someone calling for niceness at a time when meanness is not only easy but ubiquitous. I agree that Wil is clever enough to do better.
I really look forward to reading more!
Thanks,
PG
[Reply]
Great piece Sarah. Snarky twitter is SO “mean bullies at High school” in its tone.
Like talking behind your hand with the “cool kids”.
Are we all still back in Year 8? Really?
And EVERYONE who does it (snark) thinks they’re a stand up comedian!
[Reply]
Sarah, whilst I agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment about being posative, both in life and when tweeting, I have genuine concerns about the homogenisation of thought and language. With The Age dropping Catherine Deveny, most likely due to pressure from the Politically Correct, non gender specific, people against everything, they have lost a voice from the edge, or occasionally beyond the edge. To me this is a danger. Journalism should promote and celebrate a diversity of ideas. Condeming those who offend us may silence them.
To me the Logies should institute a FARK award, in honour of Graeme Kenedy, for those who offend or shock us.
It is a sad fact that those who work in public life sacrifice a part of their personal lives. I could not do this, I would take criticism far too personally.
Neil
[Reply]
Dear Sarah,
I’m glad you’re standing up for yourself and debunking the comment made about you. I agree whole-heartedly with your position on snark. I found Catherine Deveny’s tweets to be simply horrid and unforgivable. On the other hand, I wasn’t offended by Wil Anderson’s tweets. I can’t explain why. Catherine just seemed far more sinister and hurtful. It felt as though she was filling the twitter stream with poison. I unfollowed her immediately.
I too have worked in the television industry (behind the scenes) for over 8 years, but a few years ago, decided to walk away and pursue another path for exactly the reasons you pointed out. It was soul destroying. I could not agree more with your comments about the industry.
However, I must disagree with your comments about why people choose to follow Wil. You said: “They’ve been invited there… lured by his fame. They want to be part of his inner circle”. I wasn’t lured by Wil’s fame. I’m not looking to be part of his inner circle. And I don’t think I have an intimate connection with him just because I followed him on Twitter. What about you? Is that why you initially chose to follow Wil? I’m sure it’s not. So perhaps it’s a bit unfair to assume that general-public tweeters are somehow not rational, intelligent beings, just like you. Personally, I only decided to follow Wil during the Logies because I thought I could learn the results ahead of time; meaning I could go to bed early. So I guess you could say I was just using him.
Most general-public social media users that I’ve come across are very savvy, highly intelligent, positive, engaging, well educated, successful in business and follow a broad range of things, from politicians to environmental groups, personal friends and yes, celebrities. We’re not all mindless sheep looking to be associated with famous tweeters. For example, I have chosen to follow you simply because I like your articles, tips and take on life. It resonates with me. But I also follow unknown tweeters as well.
Keeping tabs on public figures can allow us to follow trends and popular culture, which can be incredibly useful if you work in media, marketing, PR or the publishing industries – as many, many general public tweeters do. We’re not all John Smith from Fountain Lakes.
With that said, your comments about snark are spot on. As one of my non-celebrity tweeters said, Twitter became a “hot bed of Logies hate”. That it did. Well done, Sarah, for shining a light on a rather sour part of our human make-up. I hope we can all learn something from this recent debacle – myself included.
Warm Regards
Jodie
[Reply]
Hi Sarah,
I agree with your comments about Wil.
There is too much negativity in the entertainment industry as a whole. Everybody is super keen to tear down everyone for any reason.
A while ago, we started a website called TheCelebrityTruth.com. We consider ourselves the positive Perez. It’s a site that publishes entertainment NEWS, not idle gossip.
All reporting is done in a positive manner, even when the stories are not great, as we believe you can have a site like this without attempting to destroy careers.
I hope you get the time to check it out and help us spread the word as it’s tough for a little Aussie site to take on the big guns!
Cheers
David
david [@] thecelebritytruth dot com.
[Reply]
While I don’t disagree with your sentiments and insight into the industry i’m confused at the contradictory message when I read this blog subject. Maybe there is some personal motivation in publicly critising another media personality, which I don’t have a problem with in the realm of freedom of speech within reason, but it seems to contradict the essence of your message which I took as being about positivity within the industry. Surely actions speak louder than words. It would seem easy to stand behind a blog page where, seemingly, people who predominately support your ideas agree with what is written.
Maybe, just maybe, we sometimes, depending on what is going on in life at the time, take life a little too seriously and take things personally. Possibly some things that were tweeted about yourself and maybe friends within the industry have clouded what I believe is a better judgement. If you were not upset by the comments why is there a need to explain exactly that?
[Reply]
Hi Sarah,
I completely agree with you. I hate snark. I think that niceness is underrated and positivity is so much more constructive than criticism and negativity.
However, I think Jodie was right when she said that most of Wil’s followers don’t follow him because they were “lured by his fame”. I think it was a little patronising of you to say so. I made a conscious decision to follow Wil because I have been to his shows and I agree with some of his views, although I am not a huge fan of his comedy (give me Tim Minchin or Josh Thomas any day). I am not so gullible as to believe that his views are valuable simply because he is famous. And I don’t think that reading snippets of his ideas on twitter means that I am in his “inner circle”.
Anyway, to be clear, I completely agree with your sentiment about snark and nastiness, it was just that particular part I had a bit of an issue with : )
Thank you for your lovely insight as always x
[Reply]
Hi Sarah!
I totally agree with your post… my favourite saying is “You catch more bees with honey, than vinegar” and it is so true!
Keep up the great work! x
[Reply]
Can’t take the heat? Then you’re not cut out for public life. You make a choice to be there so you’re not a victim. By the way, how exactly are tweets being “thrust” upon you? Have you been tied to a chair in front of your computer, your eyelids prised open clockwork orange style? Perhaps when your captor takes a toilet break you could sneak a tweet out to let us know and we’ll call the police around to save you, you poor thing.
[Reply]
What a savvy expression of views and opinions – people sharing their opinions with confidence, grace. I do enjoy dropping into this growing community.
Terry, Jodie, Marcus and Neil all raised good points yet did not share an identical view. As you have said before Sarah it is the grey that makes life more interesting.
This post and the points it raises tends to prompt more questions for me – which I like – I may not get to the answers but enjoy being stretched in my thinking
The whole issue of snark and who participates reminds me of a couple of questions I ask myself
How do I show up? and How do I want to be remembered? Do I want to show up as a light of positivity? Do I want to be remembered as someone who drags people down?
This is what I like about twitter that it provides an opportunity for me to check out How a person shows up? Do they speak my language, stretch my thinking with their point of view, or just entertain me
I started to follow Catherine Deveny tweets a short time ago to see what all the fuss and stopped following her a short time later as she did not add value to my life. I have started to follow Wil Anderson for the same reasons and he may go the same way if I don’t get anything out of it.
[Reply]
I like your post Jo, throws a good spin on all this and reminds me to keep an open mind. I like the informed choices you are obviously making in life. Great stuff.
[Reply]
The aftermath of this issue has been interesting tooI find it strange that people who claim freedom of speech don’t feel that others also have freedom to criticise in return. I don’t think wanting to adopt a positive point of view means you have to pretend negatives don’t exist. Criticism isn’t the same as snark anyway, is it?
Thanks for the excellent article about something that really concerns me. In my opinion, sarcasm isn’t the ‘lowest form of wit’, snark is. The attempts to cloak it in terms like ‘satire’ and ‘complex ideas’ are even more annoying. There’s nothing complicated or clever about it.
I avoid snarky people too – but on Twitter if I want to read what’s said to or about someone I like then it’s thrust at me that way. 140 characters don’t require a commitment before they’re read – they’re instant messages.
Snark worries me particularly because we’re trying to develop an anti-bullying climate in young people and here it is, hailed as ‘comedy’. That’s often the first defence of a bully – ‘It was a joke’ and it causes so much harm.
David I will check out your site.
[Reply]
Great post Sarah. Snark is just meanness wrapped up as ‘comedy’. As my gran would say – if you can’t say something nice don’t say anything.
I so agree, I don’t want to be in a circle of negativity, I don’t want toxic vibes and thoughts to come near me, so have been known to stop people who are full of negativity when talking to me and walk away so not to be infected.
[Reply]
Is there any particular reason you decided to focus on Wil’s tweets, rather than those of Catherine (which I personally found to be in poorer taste than those of Wil’s)?
I just think it’s funny that half the people who’ve commented here have pretty much torn him down in the same manner they accuse him of doing to others. Two wrongs… ring a bell, folks?
Furtheremore I think it’s a pretty weak argument to say “because he’s popular, he gets retweeted a lot, and even though I unfollowed him, mutual friends (or celebrities who’ve “lured” me to follow them) like him and retweet him”. That’s kind of absurd, honestly. Maybe just stop reading once you see the “RT @Wil_Anderson”? And enjoy the rest of your day?
[Reply]
May 12th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
Hi Simone, yes, I guess it was because I was alerted to Wil’s not Catherine’s. Also, while Catherine’s were in poorer taste, Wil’s – I thought – were nastier. Catherine, to her credit, operates to make social comment. I found Wil’s to be pure snark.
Regarding the idea of not reading info…is this really possible???
[Reply]
[...] manic…they got me agitated!!! I’ve deleted a few comedians when their tone has got snarky and cynical. The effect of being bombarded with bitchy asides is powerful. You start thinking in [...]
I remember feeling the same way about the great black hole of negative energy that was Big Brother. People used to say if you dont like it, dont watch it. But that meant avoiding channel 10 all day every day to avoid the incessant advertising and voting information, all conversation with friends and family who had also seen said advertising, and even other channels’s news programs (especially after the turkey slapping incident.)
Nobody lives in a vacuum, especially in the modern age where news can spread from one corner of the world to another in a matter of seconds. You cant ever totally avoid this stuff, and negativity feeds more negativity!
[Reply]
[...] the past couple of years, snark has died. This is a good thing. Snark is what bloggers, in particular, can resort to when they’re [...]
After research just a few of the weblog posts on your web site now, and I really like your means of blogging. I bookmarked it to my bookmark web site list and shall be checking back soon. Pls check out my website as properly and let me know what you think.
[Reply]