Dana Parsons, the Los Angeles Times columnist whose recent column Naina critiqued last week took notice of her post on Sepia Mutiny, as well as some of your comments that followed. He decided to use more print space to defend himself against comments from some foreigners that bruised his ego. In the old days, “the good ol’ pre-blogosphere days,” pompous columnists could say whatever they wanted without being called out, unless the editor of the paper decided it was ok. Parsons is waking up to the fact that this isn’t the case any longer. Let’s take a look at part of his rebuttal to Naina’s post. The column was titled “Write locally, insult globally:”
Readers in Newport Beach complained years ago because I let a local resident sound off on his town…
In another column, I upset Stanton residents with some chippy remarks, all meant in good fun. Was it a cheap shot to call the city “the Gateway to Garden Grove?” Yes, but we’re all friends here.
The point is, I expected to be ripped in Newport Beach and Stanton. After all, this column runs in Orange County. They’re part of the local audience.
But those were the 1990s, the good ol’ pre-blogosphere days.
What I didn’t expect was to be clobbered last week by readers of a blog known as Sepia Mutiny that focuses on South Asia issues. That is not what I normally think of as my target audience, although I heartily welcome them if Orange County news is to their liking.
What upset some of its readers were two columns highlighted by blogger Naina Ramajayan. I’m going to guess the website is U.S.-based, because its homepage says “We work out of a top-secret bunker in North Dakota with a passel of trained monkeys…” [Link]
<
p>
It is okay to counter Naina’s points but the insinuation he makes here is clear. Parsons is attempting to get his local audience to sympathize with his plight. How dare these foreigners offer their opinion on a local OC matter. In the age of the blogosphere such things are bound to happen, he muses (winking at the audience). In case the xenophobic undertones here aren’t clear, how about the following:
Naina is free to spin the columns however she wants, although I appreciate spin much less when it touches a global audience.
and this:
But I at least can try to soothe the ruffled feathers of a miffed Stanton city councilman, as opposed to a reader I can’t reach in India.
In the end, whether you’re writing to an Orange County audience or South Asian, the words speak for themselves. And in that vein, some of Naina’s readers put more thought into the columns than she did and cut me some slack
<
p>or this:
So, sorry for the hurt feelings in India and Nepal.
<
p>What Parsons didn’t realize…well, here was my email to him (emphasis added), educating him a little about a blog called Sepia Mutiny:
Not only is our website U.S. based but all of the writers are U.S. citizens, most of us born in the U.S. (I for example have lived in CA for 18 years, 4 of which were in local LA, and I received my PhD from UCLA on Monday). We are an American blog and ~70% of our audience is American, with the rest in India, the UK, Canada, and other places. We do not focus on “South Asia Issues.” Only a minority of our posts deal with South Asia. We focus on issues of importance to mostly South Asian Americans. That is a big difference. The vast majority of our posts are about happenings in the U.S. that concern us. Your newest article is therefore misinformed. You are dealing with a mostly “local” audience. Please don’t let our names lead you to believe that we are foreign. You make it sound like Orange County news shouldn’t concern us. Orange County is our backyard.
Thanks.
<
p>A minute later I felt compelled to send a follow-up responding to his crack about “hurt feelings in India and Nepal:”
Yes, we must be from India and Nepal. That would make it all so much simpler wouldn’t it. Naina graduated from UCLA also just so you know.
<
p>I wanted to end that last email with “bitch,” but I decided to be professional. I wouldn’t want him thinking that people with foreign sounding names were impolite. After all, the local Orange County residents are quite proper.
Bottom line Mr. Parsons, in attempting to defend yourself against a slightly bruised ego, you ended up sounding like a xenophobic ass. Stick to the facts. And remember, we write globally, but we act locally.
Well written Abhi-Let’s see what wisecrack comeback he has to your letter without oozing xenophobia! A herculean task if any for this ‘columnist’
As if there weren’t any South Asian Americans living in Orange County in the “the good ol’ pre-blogosphere days” way back in the ’90s!
What a jackass!
Yeah. How dare these unwashed macacas dare to voice their own opinion? Worse, how dare they voice their opinion in a place where everyone can read it and I’m forced to respond to it. Don’t these idiots know there are proper ways to do this, like writing letters or emails so they can be ignored? Judging by their names, they’re obviously not part of my exclusive club, so who cares what they have to say on a topic that is relevant to them?
funny thing is Naina’s complaints about the LATimes were not too diffent from parson’s complaints about Naina. so easy to see xenophobia in others, so hard to see it in ourselves.
Is this guy for real? I mean just the delination between “Orange County” and “South Asian” audiences is mind blowing. As if the mere thought of those two audiences being anything but mutual exclusive is unfathomable. I mean sure, the OC ain’t no Jackson Heights, Queens–but if you are writing for a major national paper you should pass a standard “ignorance test” (kind of like the written part of the driver’s test…if you fail that, you should never drive a car!).
The India and Nepal comment is also amusing despite the obvious “foreigners” connotation. As if anyone from Nepal would really care about Dana Parsons and his impression of Mumbai, a city that is at least a thousand miles away from any section of the country. It’s not like they have their own problems or anything. Ya know, I heard Orange County news is what runs on the tickers all around Katmandhu these days…it must be all those damn MTV reality shows corrupting their way into sub continent. (next column topic Mr. Parsons?)
Lastly, if he actually visited the site and looked at the article and all the comments–did he not take notice of all the UCLA/college b-ball references?
What’s even funnier is that I predicted you’d leave a contrarian comment within the first five. On posts like this you always do. I guess you’ve been commenting for so long now that I have become attuned to your
agendaviewpoint.I have to agree with what Manju has to say in post #4
My thoughts EXACTLY. I doubt that Mr. Parsons is so small-minded as to think that 1) having ethnic heritage and 2) being American are mutually exclusive, which leads me to the sad conclusion that he probably knew this was an American site but decided to poke some fun at “those touchy foreigners” to garner a laugh from his local readers (whose intelligence he probably underestimates).
funny thing is Naina’s complaints about the LATimes were not too diffent from parson’s complaints about Naina. so easy to see xenophobia in others, so hard to see it in ourselves.
How can Naina be xenophobic against Dana?
Every one’s got one and everyone’s stinks, but here’s my 2 cents – I can see why Dana might be less than impressed with Naina’s criticisms. After all, Dana’s column wasn’t criticizing American-based Desis. If American Desies are truly the audience and community “of by and for” SM, then it is not completely reasonable to get bent out of shape when a journalist relays less-than-flattering but nonetheless truthful observations about a country that you have presumably left behind. Remember, this is America. Immigrants are “expected” to leave their allegiance to their countries of origin at the door. After all, do Blacks get bent out of shape when journalists allude to the obvious poverty in Africa? Do American-born Hispanics get defensive and spin apologies for poverty in Latin America? In many countries, poverty is real, it is in your face, and it must be accepted first in order to be dealt with. Denial is after all not just a river in Egypt . . .
I hope Dana gets canned by his new boss.
Loved your email to Parsons, Abhi (and congrats on the Ph.D.). He DID make it seem like all SM readers are in South Asia.
I can’t believe a columnist at a major paper would use up an entire column to defend himself. I guess ANNA isn’t the only sensitive one. 🙂
Oh, and Naina, good work! You hit him where it hurts.
I was so friggin’ shocked when I read this in the LA times this morning. Abhi, I’m glad you gave your e-mailed rebuttal (and then followed up with a second nani-boo-boo e-mail a minute later [is that how you defended your dissertation Monday? {ducking}]). As they say in PR, any media is good media. I am so proud that Sepia Mutiny has been mentioned in the LA Times, and that Naina’s post was articulate enough that it was able to psyche Parson out.
As Sid would say, Big Ups to Naina, Abhi, and SM!
And Mr. Parson? I too am an Angeleno, born and bred in Los Angeles, currently attending UCLA. Orange County is my backyard, and according to census.gov, it’s home to a quite a few South Asian Americans too.
The issue was not that Parson’s articles offended the “allegiance” or sensibilities of South Asian Americans, who, because they offered a nuanced critique, must clearly be more “South Asian” than “American.” That is neither here nor there and is frankly yet another offensive argument. The issue was that his manner of coverage devalued the local contributions of individuals in South Asia in improving their own communities or tackling taboo issues. Further, it looked at what was an essentially American-centric view of local stories, and it looked at the Orientalist language used to describe the “barbaric” and “backwards” India and Nepal. Parons was basically being called out for sloppy journalism.
Given that South Asian Americans have been in California for over 100 years, and definitely in Orange County/Los Angeles, it is ridiculous to assume that an issue-oriented blog has no bearing on your readership. Not only because a great number of the bloggers/readers here are U.S. citizens, but also because the LA Times does reflect a distinctly [Southern] Californian voice in international news readership.
What a tool.
wow. again, I am amazed by SM’s influence. Naina, Abhi — awesome.
quick response to Parson defenders: it doesn’t take personal allegiances to be offended by shallow, sensationalist observations, nor are such allegiances always enough to offend, nor does skin color or place of birth determine allegiance. but when shallow, sensationalist, offensive rubbish is put out there — we, the offended, have full right to call it out. Naina’s complaints were not centered on who wrote what for whom but on how it was written.
btw: congrats on the PhD!
@4 and 7, and how is that?
There is lots of hatred aginst me by these Indians and Nepalis. Things like ” wanted to end that last email with “bitch,†but I decided to be professional.”, “I hope Dana gets canned by his new boss.” etc. Oh my God, why do they hate me so much? I will write another full column focusing on all this and conveniently ignore the core point, ie criticism of my sloppy journalism. after all, they are just bloggers, who we all know are nothin more than pretend journalists. I only need to humor them.
he doesn’t know how to scroll down to read comments. blech.
this is coming from a person who grew up around the OC and is moving back to the OC.. oh dana parson, we’re going to have a grand old time. bring it.
.
HAHA.. yeah right..
all we need to do now folks… is ‘hug it out bitches!’
wow…it’s like he didn’t read naina’s post at all…it like he just saw the brown website, the word “sepia,” and just assumed we’re all indians from india. i would’ve thought that even a cursory persual, it would’ve been obvious this an american run site. that whole knee jerk they’re-not-white-so-obviously-they’re-not-american is disconcerting. how old is this guy? why would he automatically assume that a brown person reading the L.A. times couldn’t possibly be an american?
that said…i agree with #18.
but most sepia mutiny readers are indeed in south asia. south asia is in the us, is it not?
That is EXACTLY what I want to see first thing in the morning. Awesome. I know, I know…the emoticon makes it all better. And I just proved your point. Still, as soon as I saw it, I cringed and had my now-daily micro-crisis about “Why the FUCK do I put myself out there again?” I assure you that once I have my third coffee, I’ll model your emoticon instead of Morrissey’s angst.
Abhi, I hope he has enough testicular fortitude to respond to your correction.
And as for the devil’s advocate…yes, we are all Americans here, but until OTHER Americans see us that way, articles like Parsons’ directly affect our fellow citizens perceptions of us, even if we were born, raised and will always be here.
This is awful. Naina’s original post was a thoughful and thought provoking scan of race roles and cultural criticism. It was a wide open debate with differing viewpoints on the legitimacy and underlying meanings of Parson’s original statements. Parsons has turned this into a pity party for himself, and quite honestly abhi, I don’t believe you did anything to really change that.
Congratulations on your PhD, but it sounded to me like degree dropping was higher on your agenda than defending the honest intentions of Naina’s original post and the diverse opinions of commenters on this blog. (That isn’t mean to sound as harsh as it does – sorry.)
You made all the legitmate points, and its obvious Parsons ignores them for the benefit of his own persecution. But I think this really is about being Desi in America then criticisms of poverty and injustice “over there” shouldn’t be something we get our backs up about, but should be embracing and working to change. I am glad a number of other commenters on this board get that.
Ummm, yeah that must be it. Cuz, you know, we all have selfish agendas right? Like Mr. T would say, I drop suckas, not degrees. Don’t worry, unlike Parsons I am not so sensitive that I am going to waste more than 3 lines on your comment. Now I am going to go get some coffee with Anna 🙂
Well, congratulations anyway. What is like 5:30 in the AM there?
In all honesty, there is some selfishness to complaining about Parson’s original piece because it seems like we’re more interested in our own sense of image than about the actual poverty and victimization that is happening in S. Asian countries. I know it is difficult when ignorant people look down on an entire culture because of anecdotal stories, but our responsibility should be geared towards ending that poverty and eradicating the crime that happens because of it. Stories about the professor help do that, so before complaining about pissants like Parsons, it may be better to consider how to work with him, rather than excoriating him for his ignorance.
First of all, kudos to Naina. You made some excellent observations. So excellent, that they triggered a rapid foot-in-mouth response. Apparently, the truth hurts.
Like I said earlier, I was actually more annoyed than offended by Parsons article. I thought he pointed out a few things (all of which were superficial, of course), that do in fact exist in India (and elsewhere in the world!). However, I did find the tone of his column to be condescending, superficial, and juvenile. Yes, there is poverty in India. We get it.
The point of this comment was not to re-hash everything that irritated me about the post. I just wanted to say that his response to Naina’s post (and likely to Abhi’s email) unleashed a whole new dimension to the situation. If he didn’t get so far as making broad, sweeping, unfounded generalizations in the original article, he sure did with his response. Parsons: your original article merely made you seem like an ignorant ass whining about the realities of poverty when you encountered them. That article just gave me the impression that you were a first-time tourist to India and were “shocked” by some of what you saw, peering down from your balcony at the Taj Lands End.
My opinion is drastically changed by this response of your’s. You have clearly demonstrated your ignorance about South Asians, and apparently journalism in general. Everything that might have been implicit in your original article, has been screamed in your response. You felt compelled to “clarify” to us South Asians who is and is not your “target audience” because apparently you learned in journalism school that your articles are not ignorant and off-base when targeted to one “homogeneous” population. News flash: there are South Asians in OC … and everywhere else in the U.S. for that matter. If your original article wasn’t entirely so, your response was definitely one sweeping, incorrect generalization that truly paints an ugly picture of the shallow background that informs your “journalism”.
As a long-time reader but first-time commenter to this blog, I wanted to say, “Welcome to the real world of
VirginiaOrange County, SM…”Camille @14. I hope Dana gets it as cearly as you have stated.
Absolutely… but he just went wit the flow and took a completely wrong track. I dont think he understands who he is really messing with
I just don’t get it. I know desis who’ve lived in Orange County since the 1950s. I have desi friends who are US citizens and grew up in Orange County in the 60s, 70s, 80s; who went to UC-Irvine in the early 1980s long before the big wave of American desis came of age. Orange County has been one of the early landing places for desis for several generations now. There are towns in Orange County that are heavily desi, and the desi-est place in California, Artesia, is in southeastern LA County about two hops and a skip away from OC. Unless there’s some kind of thirty foot barbed wire topped wall surrounded by a barrier of white noise between LA County and OC that I hadn’t heard about, you’d think a little bit of Parsons’ readership would bleed over.
As a working journalist all I can say about this is that the assumption that writing locally for a local audience somehow absolves you from responsibility or the possibility of dialogue and criticism beyond that local arena, is absurd to begin with and patently more so in the age of globalization and mass information technology. The ensuing fallacies, such as Parsons’ apparent assumption that SM readers are in India and Nepal, or the argument his self-styled “defender” (#10 — with friends like that…) makes on this thread that immigrants are expected to leave their original country behind, cut ties, etc. — what is this, 1895? — only result from this same blindered frame of mind.
I agree with the person on this thread (#27) who said that the original Parsons column was no big deal — just a trifle in which he pulled together bits and pieces of flotsam to make deadline. Writing a column two or three times a week is quite difficult and folks do have off days. The “offenses” to South Asia in that first piece were really quite microscopic and it’s a lot of wasted time and negative energy to get one’s back up about that sort of thing. However as the commenter pointed out, Parsons’ second column, the response to Naina, was over the top and deserves all the flaming it gets. It exposes a frame of mind that — whether it is actually Parsons’ or that of his column writing persona or that which he attributes to his average reader — isn’t so much offensive or disrespectful as it is hopelessly and fatally behind the times.
i grew up in the orange county area.. am familar with newport beach.. lots of indians do live there…and in artesia, diamond bar, etc…
hard to click with a a global audience? come on now.. it’s hard to click with anything you write parsons…for me anyways..
Abhi, I understand your rebuttal, as some of these ersatz journalists ought to be schooled that “Hello! People of South Asian descent were born and live in the States, one of them may be your next-door neighbor (horrors) and they are aware of and interested in things that go beyond the bounds of Los Angeles.
The following is to Dana Parsons, who obviously just tripped upon the internet:
Then don’t write about topics involving people whose feathers you can ruffle or unruffle as the winds change, i.e. Nepalese socioeconomics or naked children relieving themselves on the streets of India. Stick to a crack deal going down in Stanton, Cardinal Mahony’s comments on Fabian Nunez or the latest Whitney Houston – Bobby Brown cour imbroglio. Follow that old writer’s credo, you know, the one that goes “Write what you know and can unruffle.”
That was meant to read, “Then don’t write about topics involving people whose feathers you cannot ruffle or unruffle as the winds change.” Hey, Abhi and ANNA, can I join you for coffee?
Remember, this is America. Immigrants are “expected” to leave their allegiance to their countries of origin at the door.
I think that’s a national myth taken as self evident. There are many types of allegiances – religious and cultural, ethnic, purely emotional – and not everyone “leaves them at the door.”
As a working journalist all I can say about this is that the assumption that writing locally for a local audience somehow absolves you from responsibility or the possibility of dialogue and criticism beyond that local arena, is absurd to begin with and patently more so in the age of globalization and mass information technology.
Small American papers that write about India in a putatively distorting way are likely to get responses not just from its townspeople but from Ashok in Bengaluru. Thank google for that.
i wanna come too!
The dude does not seem very smart going by this, since he says he is writing for Orange county which has a large number of desis and then tactlessly hints at generalizations which will probably alienate even more of his desi readers. He could have easily let this go.
Abhi,
Well written e-mail to Mr. Parsons but I think you took too much offense with Zoroastrian. What if you weren’t a Ph.D from UCLA? What if you were a clerk or a fast food restaurant worker? Does the weight of your argument (that we are as American as he is even though we are brown) depend on your stature as a highly educated (i.e. respectable) person? We (Americans of South Asian decent) seem to think that we have to legitimize our place in this country by reciting our degrees, our professions, our incomes, etc. Maybe this is an insecurity common to all non-white Americans.
Zoroastrian, the point you make in your second paragraph in #26 is absolutely correct. Nethertheless, we can’t help getting our feelings hurt by numbskulls like Parsons who only show one aspect of India to people who are generally ignorant about the rest of the world.
Isn’t this an insecurity common to everyone?
No. I’ve checked. And it actually is better to excoriate him. It’s not time for kumbaya yet.
Well, applepie, for those who are not yet as American as you are, there are multiple techniques for getting there. It’s nothing to do with insecurity–it’s to do with not being ashamed of your accomplishments, whatever they might be. Of course in general terms Abhi’s UCLA PhD doesn’t matter, but in the specific terms of this argument–who’s American, who belongs, who has a voice in the argument, who’s “us”–it matters exquisitely.
Congratulations on a fine smackdown, Abhi, and on your doctorate. (Say, when are you returning to your country?)
The point isn’t that Abhi has a Ph.D. from UCLA, but rather that he has a Ph.D. from UCLA. That is, he is very much the local audience, and not some foreign dude. Why bring it up at all? Simple – reading comprehension. If Abhi was a high school dropout, Parsons could say more easily that you didn’t understand my article at all. The Ph.D. serves to certify that Abhi can competently read the newspaper.
p.s. it’s hilarious to me that Abhi’s diploma will be signed by Ahnold!
i read dana’s column when a tipster posted it. i wonder if he will reply to your email by another email, or waste more space on the LA Times. but nice touch by adding naina graduated from UCLA.
Can’t be desier than Yuba City! No way man!
yes way.. or is it fremont? 🙂
You know, this Parsons fellow had a good point. I too thought that Naina overreacted. He was on a good track, until he insinuated that Naina is a foreigner, and that SM is based in India. D’oh! Hopefully he sets the record straight after he reads abhi’s email
Mr K You disappoint me. By implying that a Phd from an Amreekan school like UCLA somehow makes you more qualified to challenge Dana, more part of “us”, you betray your own outdated brown sahib/uncle tom mentality. So, if Abhi was an IIT graduate, he would not be eligible to voice his opinion right?
Yuba city is desier than Freemont (or used to be). Desis have been there for around a century now.
Maitri @ 34 and Chick Pea @ 36: I could join Abhi and Anna for coffee. I hope Abhi will exccccccccccccccuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeeeeeeeeee me. Fly to the most powerful city in the world, and we can all (pour) have coffee over Dana Parson’s arrogance!!
“… it’s to do with not being ashamed of your accomplishments, whatever they might be. Of course in general terms Abhi’s UCLA PhD doesn’t matter, but in the specific terms of this argument–who’s American, who belongs, who has a voice in the argument, who’s “us”–it matters exquisitely.”
I’m ashamed to admit that I don’t get your point completely. My point, however, is that in this particular argument it only matters that Abhi is an American and a Los Angeles local.
Congratulations Dr. Abhi! 🙂
Just wait til we roll out our new feature, y’all: “Ask Dr. Abhi!” No question too embarrassing to ask!