Media Ethics, Blogging & "Battlestar Galactica"

This post was originally going to be about the mainstream media and online magazines, and how they play fast and loose when it comes to crediting bloggers.  I was winding up for a good old rant and then...well, read on.

Last week I wrote a post for BlogHer called "Battlestar Galactica," A Frakking Good TV Show."  I cross it posted here on Megan's Minute.  It covered a bunch of things I love about the show, including the many great women characters. Throughout the post, I also linked to several other blogs and articles about BSG.. 

One of those links was to a post called, "'Battlestar Galactica' Continues Gynocide."  It was written by Ariel Wetzel and posted on the Feminist SF blog on January 18, 2009.  While reading through articles about BSG and looking for links for my post, I used the one from Feminist SF because it was the only one I found which argued that BSG wasn't such a great feminist show after all because of the number of women characters being bumped off. 

I found the post by using Google Blog Search and then I was linked back to it from Alas, A Blog, and a post called "Battlestar Galactica and Sexism."   There was also further discussion of the topic on a different Alas, A Blog post called "The Joys Of Juxtaposition."

Okay, so I write and publish my post, and go along my merry way.  Then on March 5th I read a post on Slate called, "Chauvinist Pigs In Space, Why "Battlestar Galactica" is Not So Frakking Feminist After All" by Juliet Lapidos.*

Now, when I saw the title of the Slate article it gave me pause for two reasons.  First because I vaguely wondered, since it was so recent, if my BlogHer post might be linked in it and second because it was only the second post I had come across that argued the anti-feminist point. 

Ms. Lapidos' article however went further than the one on Feminist SF, by giving more background about women in science fiction from "Star Trek" to "Return of the Jedi."   She also referred to a rant by Dirk Benedict, a co-star of the original 1970's series and how he thinks the new BSG is terrible because his former male character Starbuck, is now a woman and how modern feminism, which he feels guides the show, is a scourge upon mankind.

The question Ms. Lapidos poses as the basis for her article:  "Is Battlestar—now in its final season—the televised culmination of the feminist movement?"

Her ultimate answer to the question is, "No," and part of her reasoning involves the number of female characters being bumped off:

Cally's death is an example of a worrisome trend: The main female characters are all dying, dead, or not human. Ellen, Sharon, D'Anna, and Tory Foster—all strong female characters, have all turned out to be Cylons, and Starbuck was recently revealed as a half-Cylon hybrid. Adm. Cain, for a time the highest ranking officer in the military, was assassinated; Cally was murdered; Dee, Capt. Lee Adama's neglected wife, committed suicide; and Starbuck's rival, Capt. Louanne Katraine, pretty much did, too—she sacrificed herself while guiding civilian ships through a dangerous star cluster. The president, perhaps the most-talked-about example of Battlestar's great female leads, is dying of breast cancer. In isolation, none of these cases has much significance. But taken together they suggest a troubling, if unintentional message: Women—the human ones, anyway—just can't hack it when the going gets rough.

After I read this passage and read further into the article, I'm waiting for Ms. Lapidos to link to the Feminist SF post.  I thought because she knew about the Dirk Benedict rant and a couple of other posts she linked to, she must have come across the Feminist SF post as well.

That's because while researching my own BSG post, I kept being linked back to the Dirk Benedict post and the Feminist SF post among others, as places where the discussion about BSG and feminism was happening. 

So as I finished the article I got a little indignant.  Ms. Lapidos must have come across the Feminist SF post on this same topic, so why didn't she link to it?

But she didn't.  In her article she links only to several posts in Wikipedia, one YouTube video, an article in Elle, a post in Wired, and to Dirk Benedict's site with his original rant that ran in Dreamwatch five years ago.

I contacted a very experienced fellow blogger and when I described the situation to her, she too thought Ms. Lapidos probably should have linked to the Feminist SF post. 

Another blogger I talked to suggested I write a post about it and provide the links that led me to the Feminist SF post in the first place.

That's how this post came about and I sat down to write. 

Then I was like, wait a minute.  How did I get to that Feminist SF post?

Thank God for history archives.  I sifted through my Firefox history and tracked down every BSG page I looked at while researching my post. Then I re-read them to see which linked to the Feminist SF post. 

Imagine my shock when I discovered it was only one.  The "Battlestar Galactica and Sexism" post on  Alas, A Blog.

Now, here I thought I'd read so many posts linking to the Feminist SF post when in fact I hadn't.  How did that happen?  All I can think is that after reading so many BSG posts in such a short space of time and checking links back and forth, I obviously thought more posts had linked to Feminist SF than actually had.

So it was entirely possible Ms. Lapidos never came across the Feminist SF post at all.  Her research may only have gone as far as the sites she linked to and obviously there's nothing wrong with that.

I learned two very important things from this whole exercise.  Number one, your mind can play tricks on you when you're linking back and forth among posts on the same topic.  Number two, I need to be more conscious of tracking and archiving my research.  You never know when you may need to explain how you got where you did.

However there's another significant issue here.  The issue of giving credit and linking is one the mainstream media and the blogosphere will need to address more satisfactorily as blogging and journalism on the internet continue to grow.

Let's say the New York Times writes an article tomorrow about how BSG is not the feminist show everybody thinks it is.  They don't use every argument Ms. Lapidos does, but they use a couple.  And they don't link to anyone but they interview a prominent feminist and someone who knows the history of women in science fiction. 

Is this another example of the mainstream media getting ideas from bloggers and online journalists and not giving them due credit?

Did they get the idea from Ms. Lapidos' Slate article?  Or from the Feminist SF post?  Or from this post?  Or did the author think of the idea on their own simply because lots of people are writing about the show because it ends in two weeks?

Hard to know, isn't it?

If the New York Times writes a post on this topic tomorrow because they have read about it here, and on Slate, and on Feminist SF, should they link to all of us?

I say yes...but what do you think?

Related Links:

Venetian Blond, "History Boys and 'Battlestar Galactica."

The Daily Gimpei:  "Damn You Slate:  'Battlestar Galactica' Edition"

*An update:  I messaged Juliet Lapidos about this post and asked her to comment if she chose.  She messaged me back that she hadn't come across the Feminist SF post.

Now, when I saw the title of the Slate article it gave me pause for two reasons.  First because I vaguely wondered, since it was so recent, if my BlogHer post might be linked in it and second because it was only the second post I had come across that argued the anti-feminist point. 

Ms. Lapidos' article however went further than the one on Feminist SF, by giving more background about women in science fiction from "Star Trek" to "Return of the Jedi."   She also referred to a rant by Dirk Benedict, a co-star of the original 1970's series and how he thinks the new BSG is terrible because his former male character Starbuck, is now a woman and how modern feminism, which he feels guides the show, is a scourge upon mankind.

The question Ms. Lapidos poses as the basis for her article:  "Is Battlestar—now in its final season—the televised culmination of the feminist movement?"

Her ultimate answer to the question is, "No," and part of her reasoning involves the number of female characters being bumped off:

Cally's death is an example of a worrisome trend: The main female characters are all dying, dead, or not human. Ellen, Sharon, D'Anna, and Tory Foster—all strong female characters, have all turned out to be Cylons, and Starbuck was recently revealed as a half-Cylon hybrid. Adm. Cain, for a time the highest ranking officer in the military, was assassinated; Cally was murdered; Dee, Capt. Lee Adama's neglected wife, committed suicide; and Starbuck's rival, Capt. Louanne Katraine, pretty much did, too—she sacrificed herself while guiding civilian ships through a dangerous star cluster. The president, perhaps the most-talked-about example of Battlestar's great female leads, is dying of breast cancer. In isolation, none of these cases has much significance. But taken together they suggest a troubling, if unintentional message: Women—the human ones, anyway—just can't hack it when the going gets rough.

After I read this passage and read further into the article, I'm waiting for Ms. Lapidos to link to the Feminist SF post.  I thought because she knew about the Dirk Benedict rant and a couple of other posts she linked to, she must have come across the Feminist SF post as well.

That's because while researching my own BSG post, I kept being linked back to the Dirk Benedict post and the Feminist SF post among others, as places where the discussion about BSG and feminism was happening. 

So as I finished the article I got a little indignant.  Ms. Lapidos must have come across the Feminist SF post on this same topic, so why didn't she link to it?

But she didn't.  In her article she links only to several posts in Wikipedia, one YouTube video, an article in Elle, a post in Wired, and to Dirk Benedict's site with his original rant that ran in Dreamwatch five years ago.

I contacted a very experienced fellow blogger and when I described the situation to her, she too thought Ms. Lapidos probably should have linked to the Feminist SF post. 

Another blogger I talked to suggested I write a post about it and provide the links that led me to the Feminist SF post in the first place.

That's how this post came about and I sat down to write. 

Then I was like, wait a minute.  How did I get to that Feminist SF post?

Thank God for history archives.  I sifted through my Firefox history and tracked down every BSG page I looked at while researching my post. Then I re-read them to see which linked to the Feminist SF post. 

Imagine my shock when I discovered it was only one.  The "Battlestar Galactica and Sexism" post on  Alas, A Blog.

Now, here I thought I'd read so many posts linking to the Feminist SF post when in fact I hadn't.  How did that happen?  All I can think is that after reading so many BSG posts in such a short space of time and checking links back and forth, I obviously thought more posts had linked to Feminist SF than actually had.

So it was entirely possible Ms. Lapidos never came across the Feminist SF post at all.  Her research may only have gone as far as the sites she linked to and obviously there's nothing wrong with that.

I learned two very important things from this whole exercise.  Number one, your mind can play tricks on you when you're linking back and forth among posts on the same topic.  Number two, I need to be more conscious of tracking and archiving my research.  You never know when you may need to explain how you got where you did.

However there's another significant issue here.  The issue of giving credit and linking is one the mainstream media and the blogosphere will need to address more satisfactorily as blogging and journalism on the internet continue to grow.

Let's say the New York Times writes an article tomorrow about how BSG is not the feminist show everybody thinks it is.  They don't use every argument Ms. Lapidos does, but they use a couple.  And they don't link to anyone but they interview a prominent feminist and someone who knows the history of women in science fiction. 

Is this another example of the mainstream media getting ideas from bloggers and online journalists and not giving them due credit?

Did they get the idea from Ms. Lapidos' Slate article?  Or from the Feminist SF post?  Or from this post?  Or did the author think of the idea on their own simply because lots of people are writing about the show because it ends in two weeks?

Hard to know, isn't it?

If the New York Times writes a post on this topic tomorrow because they have read about it here, and on Slate, and on Feminist SF, should they link to all of us?

I say yes...but what do you think?

Related Links:

Venetian Blond, "History Boys and 'Battlestar Galactica."

The Daily Gimpei:  "Damn You Slate:  'Battlestar Galactica' Edition"

*An update:  I messaged Juliet Lapidos about this post and asked her to comment if she chose.  She messaged me back that she hadn't come across the Feminist SF post.