How TIRING it all is!

Reader-submitted complaint: what a bitter, sad lady you are...

AHAHAHAHAHA.

That's all you've got? I expected much, much more from you: at least a semicolon or two, a capital letter and a few subordinate clauses. Are your fingers tired from sending anonymous messages to all of the people who thought your last column was ridiculous?

Really, you need to do a better job of responding to your critics if you want to call yourself a writer. Especially if you're a narcissist who's going to come here every single day through a Google search for your own name. I'm just giving you a fair warning. You definitely don't have to come here if you don't like what I say.

Since you didn't provide one, I will do my own critique of that post in your typical style. Consider it a gift.

Megan, who apparently does not see fit to blog under her full name even though this could be determined with even the slightest bit of effort (although I choose not to expend it; life as a Toronto columnist is very arduous), has submitted an assessment of my latest column, in which I, defender of all that is virtuous about Canadian journalism, dared to challenge the dogma which states that blogging is preferable to true journalism printed in the newspaper.

I don't know why I bother to read critiques from anonymous writers, although in retrospect, I suppose that if I truly wanted to avoid that sort of writing I would stop Googling myself on a daily basis. Clearly, that's not an option.

This "Megan" fancies herself a writer, but clearly she is not serious about it, or she would be a Real Writer like I am instead of an anonymous person on the Internet. I've written books, and I publish them under my own name. Not like people on the Internet, where there are no rules and where real journalists definitely wouldn't write anything at all.

Clearly, this "Megan" has never heard of The Long Tail, or she would have referenced it in her rambling, unfocused treatise. This groundbreaking new idea is fresh out of Harvard, I think. All of the cool people are talking about it, which is probably why "Megan" doesn't seem to know what it is: it is simply out of her realm for now. I, of course, am an early adopter, and I totally GET these new ideas and their implications for journalism in our society. I also note that she does not have a Wikipedia page, so I think you know what that means.

But I am not hurt by the criticism. Not at all. In fact, I don't care. I don't care so much that I am leaving anonymous messages of the kind you might hear in a bar, where I, naturally, spend a lot of time paying rapt attention to cool boys who say things like "LOL" out loud. It's RESEARCH. I hope to use this information to convince my counterparts, using colourful anecdotes, of the necessity of staying current, so as to better attract the younger generation to our newspaper. For example, there is nothing more "hip" and "now" than classical music, which is why I railed against the CBC's plans to scale back its classical programming, and blogging is certainly, if not already, going the way of the dodo bird, which is why I completely don't care if some nobody in the blogosphere thinks I'm not a very good writer.

Thanks for stopping by, Russell.