I so agree with Mr. Stein. This just ran in the Las Vegas paper today 1-5-07. I feel the same about cell phones and email. Why must I answer? I am not a Doctor and I am not on call. People all feel like they should be able to reach you whenever they feel like it. If he wants another opinion he will ask for it. When the book you are reading has an ending you don't like do you email the author??

Gee, what now to make of the e-mail I recieved a couple of months ago from Joel, saying that he read and appreciated the e-mail rant I sent him? It wasn't even a (completely) standard reply either as he referred to a funny point in the rant that had made him laugh.

I can only conclude that he cares, he really does care!

Joel,

The bad news - I have a problem similar to yours.
The good news – I have found a solution.

My so called friends are constantly sending me emails containing their unsolicited opinions. What makes this a problem is that all my friends are idiots.

Here’s my solution - don’t read their email, just “reply” with your own opinion on the subject. Basically what they’ve done is provide you a perfect opportunity to talk AT them.

Stick with me on this one Joel.

Amen, Joel Stein! Everything need not be "interactive" and consumer-driven. Journalists are educated professionals who worked and/or studied to become better at filtering and presenting information than people who don't have any sort of journalistic training.

Journalists spend time thoughtfully breaking down complex events and ideas and plans and reports in order that readers and viewers can digest the information with much less time and effort. Knowledgeable citizens and the free exchange of information are important parts of democracy, and that should interest every American.

I've edited work from columnists who claim the number of emails they have received in support reflects what the public believes. Boy do they get a shock at election time. Good on you, Joel. Frame your ideas; file your copy on time; enjoy the non-professional part of your life.

Paul Wiggins
Homebush, NSW, Australia

Traditionally journalists have always written their stuff and have never had to carry on a dialogue with its readers. They went on to other jobs. And who says this dialogue is necessarily a good thing? Haven't we seen enough journos-turned-idealogue, complete with TV show, newspaper column, book deal and a new, younger wife?

If we can save Joel or any other LA Times journo from joining the ranks of the overfed and bloated, we really should. Think of it as our humanitarian duty to save him from a life of senseless diets, botox and the requisite stay at Betty Ford.

Don't write Joel Stein. Get your news sources from lots of places and don't get hung up on what any one person says or thinks.

Your pretend hubris is mediocre.

I can't believe how people are really taking your column personally and vowing never to read it again!

Joel, your column cracked me up. It was well-written, and one can't help but admire your forthrightness and honesty.

That's fine with me if you want to talk at me. Columnists have done that for years, and no one ever complained. Thanks for stirring up our wheels of thought. Keep up the good work!

Spot on Joel. We live in a warped society that believes we ALL are worthy of interest. All our opinions are noteworthy. And all our communications should be responded to, or else we have been insulted in the most horrible fashion: we have been deemed insignificant.

Clue to you all: your (and my) opinions are generally insignificant. If you want an interactive venue, find a blog comments page and chat away. But Joel, although I find you a self-absorbed know-it-all, you are a smart ass. And better a smart one than a dumb one. I'll continue to read and be annoyed by you. I'll save my comments for the fish bowl drop at my local lunch counter. At least I might win free lunch for my office that way.

First of all, let me prevent one major misunderstanding by satying at the outset: I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of the Stein Admiration Society.

That said, I actually enjoyed his column explaining why he will not reply to e-mails. But unlike some who responded, I took his description "talk _at_ you" as somewhat tongue-in-cheek. The column has more logical cohesion when read that way, whether that is what he really meant or not;)

So why did I enjoy it? Because the attitude he criticizes, both implicitly and explicitly, really deserves the criticism. It is NOT genuine dialogue to sound off with your own screed as so many people do. On the contrary: doing such things is FAR more deadly to genuine dialog than refusing to answer, on the grounds that he wants to "talk _at_ you".

Finally, just because he is writing a column, refusing to answer emails, does not even mean he is eschewing dialog. On the contrary: there _is_ such a thing as public dialog, which goes on rather slowly in the mass media, which accept feedback only in more indirect ways. _Good_ journalists, columnists and social commentators have been engaging in this dialog for centuries now. Whether or not Joel is one of these is not a question I am going to tackle right now;) I just want to remind people that is _is_ possible, and _highly_ desirable.

At least Ryan Fishman the journalist is honest about being a journalist who reports his story from his opinion. Unlike these boneheads who claim to be unbiased. We all have opinions, why lie? As far as looking down at the undereducated, why not just list which races to look down at? Demographics show who is who. There are idiots every-undereducated, overeducated, and just plain edumacated. My Masters doesn't make me much smarter than my co-workers who have their Bachelors.
By the way, Stein is right, don't respond to this because I don't care. Especially from overeducated higher than thou idiots.

I was starting to think Joel's column is turning lame, but look at the response: over a hundred comments in two days. He should be getting a raise for stirring such controversy & confusion...