The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Should you respond to FFN posts that are designed to elicit emotion?
Should the professional network of firefighters that participate on this website tolerate blatant posts (noted below) that are designed to elicit emotional responses from the membership?
My personal opinion is no. I understand the social side of this site and like many other firefighters, I put up with the myriad of posts from those folks inspiring to become firefighters. Even though some of the posts get annoying we all know that it's ok to ask what may appear to be ridiculous questions. We all started someplace.
What is not right is the use of race issues, religion or sexual preference to stir the pot, make people angry and point fingers at folks who quite frankly (if they are anything like me) were surprised to read such an obvious attempt to get folks to respond.
Is it just me or do you come here to get away from that kind of nonsense?
I'm pleading with the membership to stick to the job and helping our younger brothers and sisters learn and do this incredibly important service for our communities. This type of post offers nothing positive and accomplished nothing for the fire service.
Am I alone here? Is anyone else as incensed as I was when the below post was read?
Another Noose?
This morning I read about yet another noose being discovered in either the locker or the personal belongings of a black firefighter somewhere in this country. It seems this noose-making is an odd trend in the fire service, as this is probably the third time I've read a story like this in the past year.
Why is racism, particularly racism against African Americans, so common in the fire service? (Remember: First responders are held to a higher standard, so if you do something once, like leave a noose in someone's locker, and it's reported, people will remember it and judge you for it for a long time.)
I read another unrelated story yesterday in which a firefighter rescued a woman from her burning home. He was truly elated to have been her rescuer. The world needs this type of guy. Everyone needs a hero, and many people enter the fire service hoping to become a hero. But you can't call yourself a hero if you rescue people by day and sneak nooses into their lockers by night.
Are people trying to maintain the "old school" fire service (strictly white guys)? And if so, doesn't that make the fire service just an extension of the KKK?
My personal opinion is no. I understand the social side of this site and like many other firefighters, I put up with the myriad of posts from those folks inspiring to become firefighters. Even though some of the posts get annoying we all know that it's ok to ask what may appear to be ridiculous questions. We all started someplace.
What is not right is the use of race issues, religion or sexual preference to stir the pot, make people angry and point fingers at folks who quite frankly (if they are anything like me) were surprised to read such an obvious attempt to get folks to respond.
Is it just me or do you come here to get away from that kind of nonsense?
I'm pleading with the membership to stick to the job and helping our younger brothers and sisters learn and do this incredibly important service for our communities. This type of post offers nothing positive and accomplished nothing for the fire service.
Am I alone here? Is anyone else as incensed as I was when the below post was read?
Another Noose?
This morning I read about yet another noose being discovered in either the locker or the personal belongings of a black firefighter somewhere in this country. It seems this noose-making is an odd trend in the fire service, as this is probably the third time I've read a story like this in the past year.
Why is racism, particularly racism against African Americans, so common in the fire service? (Remember: First responders are held to a higher standard, so if you do something once, like leave a noose in someone's locker, and it's reported, people will remember it and judge you for it for a long time.)
I read another unrelated story yesterday in which a firefighter rescued a woman from her burning home. He was truly elated to have been her rescuer. The world needs this type of guy. Everyone needs a hero, and many people enter the fire service hoping to become a hero. But you can't call yourself a hero if you rescue people by day and sneak nooses into their lockers by night.
Are people trying to maintain the "old school" fire service (strictly white guys)? And if so, doesn't that make the fire service just an extension of the KKK?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
The type of BS that was cited in the "noose" post (unfortunately)can be a part of the fire service as well. I would guess that 99.99% of all my brothers and sisters in the service would be apalled and infuriated by such childish crap. But that doesn't mean the other .001% don't exist.
You're right Reg, and I do agree about some of what you said. I could see a conversation about a noose or something, but I agree with the masses here that what was written was lumping all firefighters together to somehow imply the fire service is just an extension of the KKK. Of course it isn't, but what is more infuriating....at least to me....is this person is an outsider. She has NO firefighting experience at all, she just works for a fire service publication and instead of understanding this is not how it is in the fire service, she stupidly made her comments. And I think that such emotional threads will not go away, nor will people not respond, but there is a difference between conversation vs accusation.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
Good hearing from you Reg. As always, your down under no nonsense viewpoints are always appreciated by the membership and myself. And yes, I'm aware that the very tone of my post also strikes an emotional response. Duh... Sure beats discussing what color your fire helmet is now doesn't it? :D
-
-
well said John...
-
Permalink Reply by Beverly on
-
Wait a second....I may not agree with what the original post said but this is AMERICA and we have a freedom of speech...no matter how uneducated we sound when we say it. If we censor and legislate every word and action then no one will be allowed to have an opinion. I may not agree with a word anyone says but under no circumstances will I promote censorship of opinion. People do not agree all the time (just check your own firehouse and home) but opinions foster emotions and some people are more vocal at expressing them than others.
A social site contains all types of people and opinions, if you want a strictly "technical" site as it relates to firefighting then please start your own site where you have those groundrules set...but Cpt B don't leave here because of some idiotic opinions.
So, please, express you opinions, but allow others to do so also.
-
-
People do not agree all the time (just check your own firehouse and home) but opinions foster emotions and some people are more vocal at expressing them than others.
I don't see this as promoting censorship at all, but addressing an issue regarding threads specifically designed to garner an emotional response. As it is, this thread in it's own way is also generating an emotional response, but a difference being it is also a conversation. That is what the editor of FireRescue mag should be doing, but instead she made an accusation that basically the fire service is just an off shoot of the KKK.
Now, I have no problem with a conversation or even an emotional response, but I do have a problem when accusations are made by one's unthoughtout opinion that paints ALL firefighters with quite a broad brush, but does not come back to address the issue. Is this really a conversation? We seen too many such threads where people start an emotional response thread, and NEVER come back to interject their own opinion or why they are asking the question and so forth. Is it just there to infuriate or is there to be substance?
The issue I have with this person is that she is one who should know better to understand that the whole noose issue is isolated and is not the fire service, nor majority of FF's promoting the noose, yet she painted it that way. Being an editor for Fire Rescue, one has to wonder is this a way to garner a response from the masses to sell more mags? If so, I would think you have many on here looking to cancel a subscription because of her unthoughout opinion.
In a sense I see her opinion as a painting all FF's in the same light as those who left a noose and basically saying the fire service is an extension of the KKK, and personally I would like to see her come on here and defend her remarks. I don't care if she has an opinion, but I want her to stand up for her remarks and why she made such an opinion and decided to lump ALL firefighters together.
In a sense it would be the same thing as her coming out and saying ALL firefighters are arsonists because there have been some cases of firefighters accused of arson. We know it isn't ALL firefighters, but why make that impression?
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
I personally didn't (and still don't) take offense at what was written. Granted it was over the top in (even) loosely trying to associate the fire service with 'dem good ole boys'. Mostly, in my opinion it was just poor writing at best, schlock writing at worst.
Stating that because racism exists within the fire service, and drawing upon a vast three examples, the writer was able to (in her mind) extrapolate that we are only barely removed from (or strongly associated with) the heinous group she referenced. Perhaps an "editor" for such a magazine subscribes to a different set of journalistic values and standards than professional editors do.
The above being said, what does bother me most is the constant cross-over, or bleed through from one side of this site (advertisers) to the other (members). We quite often find ourselves being lectured, scolded or taunted by someone who is not fire/ems and is clearly out to promote their own business interests, directly or indirectly.
In the case of this ongoing discussion, someone who is an "editor" at a sponsoring magazine writes blogs (in which she is clearly linked to her "magazine") on this site. One might assume that the point being that she/they will increase the parent magazine readership. I have yet to read anything she's written here that was in anyway contributory. It's really just about exposure and having a business presence here on FFN.
Clearly there are people writing blogs that shouldn't under any circumstance be allowed near a keyboard, either because they lack the ability to formulate a coherent thought or because they do so only to express their viewpoint and then close or delete their discussion. While there are of course some very well written blogs, all too often appear those that are all about self-promotion. However you choose to define that, I think Devone-Pacheco's blog is an exemplar of that type.
I don't see any infringement on freedom of speech. No more so than when groups of indignant, morally superior people decide to boycott a store, chain or other business because of something that has been done, sold or supported that violated the groups personal ethics. I believe that is considered to be a fair practice and not censorship.
What is important here is sales, branding and commerce. If a person, or an article can affect or taint the aforementioned three then it is only good business practice to reduce the exposure of -or eliminate- whomever is responsible. That clearly is not censorship, it's just good business practice.
So I am not offended by Devone-Pacheco's poorly thought out and weakly presented article (think - puff piece gone awry) but rather the barely concealed contempt she (and others) has for us, in that she thought we wouldn't notice. We have, and no matter how those of us have taken it I think we all agree that it was unwarranted and insulting. I suspect though that the blog has gotten a number of hits as a result so Cindy, good job!!!
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Shaw on
-
My short answer is yes. We are an emotional lot, if we were not, would we care as much about what we do? The real question is, should supposedly responsible media outlets post inflammatory articles designed to bait arguments and ferment disputes within what should be a brotherhood?
-
Permalink Reply by Peter Lupkowski on
-
I would like to draw an analogy here to a post WWII poem by Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemöller. The poem is very famous and goes on in part saying first they came for the Jews, and I did not say anything because I was not a Jew. Later when they came for me there was no one left to speak out.
We must speak out every time because accepted wisdom must be excepted when it is not true. The analogy is weak but I think that you understand my thought process.
-
Permalink Reply by Fire Rescue Magazine on
-
FireRescue Editor-in-Chief Responds to Controversial Post
Yesterday, a post by a FireRescue magazine editor, Cindy Devone, sparked controversy. Cindy referred to a recent department incident in which a noose had been found in a black firefighter’s car. Her post ended with the question, “Are people trying to maintain the "old school" fire service (strictly white guys)? And if so, doesn't that make the fire service just an extension of the KKK?”
On behalf of everyone at FireRescue, I apologize profusely for this post. It was an extremely poor choice of words. Having known Cindy for over two years, I know she holds the fire service in the utmost regard. I also know she is passionate about civil liberties and that this post was an emotional response to an emotional issue. Cindy by no means meant to paint the fire service in a bad light or to insinuate a connection between firefighters and racism. Nevertheless, it was a mistake to use such inflammatory words. It is not the policy of FireRescue to draw conclusions on ongoing investigations, and this post does not represent the beliefs or policies of our magazine and Web site.
Part of the value of Firefighter Nation is that it provides an open forum for all issues, and by its very nature that means that some discussions will illicit heated responses. I believe this is usually a good thing; however, I regret that this particular post was offensive and overly critical to some. In the future, we will measure our words more carefully; in the meantime, we will continue to concentrate on what we do best—showcasing the talent, tactics and innovations of firefighters and fire officers whose articles help firefighters across the country do their jobs better and safer.
I welcome additional feedback on this issue. Feel free to contact me (tesendelbach@msn.com) or the managing editor, Shannon Pieper (s.pieper@elsevier.com).
—Tim Sendelbach, Editor-in-Chief, FireRescue Magazine
-
Permalink Reply by Derek R. on
-
I still think an appology is in order to every FFN member. And not one that is hidden in her own personal blog. Put it where members will see it. I can "play nice" just as well as the next fella, but not to someone who won't own up to their mistakes. Saying "sorry" doesn't fix problems, I know, but at least it's a start.
-
Permalink Reply by Firefighter Nation WebChief on
-
Derek
Her blog is not hidden. It's open to all members.
WebChief
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
