Despite my extensive reading on house-training dogs, nothing seemed effective for my new pup, Bella. She was anxious and uncomfortable, and after weeks of using the bathtub as her toilet—an intelligent but messy solution—I felt a wave of relief when she finally led me to one of those tree pits lining the streets of NYC, where she could relieve herself properly. What I didn’t realize, however, was that dog urine is harmful to soil and can damage plants. People don’t appreciate it when owners let their dogs trample through their gardens, and I learned this lesson the hard way when a man on his stoop confronted me.
“Are you serious? Get your dog out of that tree pit right now!” he shouted, clearly frustrated. It was then that I learned the term “tree pit.”
This scenario is a common one: instead of conveying a message, people jump straight to punishment without offering any guidance. The man assumed I was aware of the rules and was willfully ignoring them, like a rebellious teenager. However, his aggressive manner overshadowed his message and, rather than feeling guilty, I was tempted to leave a bag of flaming dog waste on his doorstep.
This behavior is pervasive. People often leap to reprimanding others instead of teaching them. They tally their past confrontations and express their anger as if every new person is just another defiant individual refusing to learn. Yet, in this cycle of blame, no real understanding is imparted. The only takeaway is the anger itself. The person being yelled at may know they’re in the wrong but lacks the context to understand why, leaving them feeling bullied for their ignorance.
After enduring his tirade for several minutes, I finally gathered my wits and replied, “Oh, you’re one of those people.”
“What do you mean, ‘those people’?” he retorted, advancing toward me.
“The ones who shrink the world with their fury instead of expanding it through conversation.”
“Shut up!” he shot back.
“Exactly,” I said, walking away, a mix of pride and shock coursing through me.
This unchecked anger permeates various aspects of our lives, and while it often manifests in online comments, I’m increasingly seeing it reflected in journalism. Perhaps it has always existed, and I’m only just noticing. Rather than informing readers, some writers resort to yelling and condescension, assuming readers should already know what they’re trying to convey—which is precisely why they’re reading the article in the first place. The tone is becoming more strident and harder to overlook.
I understand the frustration: in 2014, we’re still battling for rights that should be unquestioned. Oppression remains a daily struggle for many, and the roots of such injustices often lie in fear and ignorance. Education is crucial—those who know must share their knowledge with those who don’t, even when it’s disheartening that not everyone recognizes universally accepted truths. We were all once uninformed, and while our ignorance may not have manifested violently, it is vital to remember that learning comes through teaching.
Sanctimonious rhetoric doesn’t inspire change; it breeds resentment. Scolding readers and peppering articles with accusatory language won’t drive progress; it’s a simplistic approach that highlights a writer’s inability to genuinely connect with others. Hostility fosters distance, and when a journalist prioritizes tone over topic, it leaves readers cringing at the writer’s self-righteousness. This can create a negative association with both the author and the publication.
Anger is a passive force—destructive yet deceptive, as it can feel like action. When I encounter combative language in an article, it appears the writer is casting blame rather than seeking solutions. This confrontational style perpetuates the idea that issues shouldn’t be discussed or explored, while simultaneously shaming readers for their ignorance. Such articles become campaigns fueled by unresolved anger, ultimately harming society and exacerbating mental health challenges. Anger is easy; engaging with difficult truths is the real challenge. We cannot chastise others for their fears and apathy when we ourselves are too afraid or lazy to elucidate our perspectives.
Trolling occurs when writers prioritize emotional outbursts over thoughtful dialogue. A growing number of online journalists adopt this combative style to mitigate their own discomfort, but anger can be isolating. Who wants to ally with someone constantly in fight mode? The more we inform others, the less isolated we feel. One individual protesting alone is often ignored; a group protesting together becomes a movement.
This article was initially published on November 25, 2014.
For those interested in home insemination, check out this helpful resource. You can also learn more about the subject at this authoritative site. For comprehensive information on pregnancy and home insemination, Healthline offers an excellent resource.
Summary
The article critiques the tendency of some journalists to use anger and aggression in their writing instead of providing informative content. By illustrating a personal experience with a confrontational individual, the piece highlights how punitive communication often fails to educate and connect. It advocates for thoughtful discourse over hostility, emphasizing the importance of teaching and understanding in journalism.