Reply #19: Perhaps, However.....

[outinforce]

I am very familiar with the role, functions, and responsibilities of an ombudsman. VERY familiar.

And while I take your point that Mr. Dvorkin should have used a more professional tone or chosen not to respond, I remain steadfast in my notion that anyone corresponding with an organization -- and especially when one is attempting to convince that organization that it should do something differently -- should avoid the sort of language and tone that Professor Little used.

Look at what she did.

Does she point out with any specificity her complaints against Juan Williams and Mara Liasson? No. Instead of pointing out specific reports or assignments that Williams or Liasson have mis-handled or in which they did not apply sound journalistic judgment, Prof. Little calls them names ("sad fools"), she questions their journalistic credentials ("these so-called journalists), and even goes so far as to suggest that they have compromised their own professional ethics by selling out to the highest bidder.

Instead, in other words, of taking the time to craft a thoughtful complaint about actual reports that Williams or Liasson had actually done, Prof. Little chose to castigate two reporters with whom she apparently disagrees.

I don't blame the ombudsman for treating such a letter with some contempt. I'm sure Professor Little would not appreciate being called a "so-called" Professor, nor would she appreciate having her own professional ethics called into question.

In fact, it strikes me that Dvorkin, in his response, treats Professor Little to a taste of what she has done to both Williams and Liasson.

And she doesn't like it at all. In fact, she calls the response "shameful".

It is just as shameful as her original letter.

In my view.