Lawyers Are Rats? Really?
I've been taking in the Maclean's article brouhaha from afar. And today, on my 10 year wedding anniversary to one of 'dem 'dar vermin, I'd like to offer a little advice to lawyers - it's time to turn the other cheek.
Every profession has its image problems. Trust me, in some people's minds we Librarians will forever be linked to books, shushing, and hair buns. And when I say turn the other cheek, let's face it - I've been suckered into responding a few times.
Let's be realistic here. Philip Slayton has a new book, and is willingly working the attention economy. Plain and simple. Macleans? Well, their journalism standards should be higher. Taking a shot at lawyers these days may sell magazines, but it's easy & cheap. And a sad reflection on a once great Canadian publication. Enough said.
Are lawyers rats? Please. Lawyers are people with every element of the human condition. Even in the biggest law firms. The article paints with a broad stroke, and unfortunately, any response must also be done with a similar blanket statement.
Can I take my own advice the next time that someone writes that 'libraries are dead' article? Who knows, probably not. Rising above when it's something you care about is no easy task. So I won't critique the CBA for giving them both barrels. Both Slayton and Macleans deserve it. At the very least for being intellectually dishonest.
So let me leave you with this. Librarians (painting with a broad stroke here) usually rate pretty high on the trust factor. And let me tell you, lawyers are not rats. Would I be married to one for past 10 years if they were?
[No. wait. Crap. Can't say that. Confidentiality clause in the non-compete premarital something or another contract...] Sorry dear. Happy anniversary, flowers are on the way! ;)
Every profession has its image problems. Trust me, in some people's minds we Librarians will forever be linked to books, shushing, and hair buns. And when I say turn the other cheek, let's face it - I've been suckered into responding a few times.
Let's be realistic here. Philip Slayton has a new book, and is willingly working the attention economy. Plain and simple. Macleans? Well, their journalism standards should be higher. Taking a shot at lawyers these days may sell magazines, but it's easy & cheap. And a sad reflection on a once great Canadian publication. Enough said.
Are lawyers rats? Please. Lawyers are people with every element of the human condition. Even in the biggest law firms. The article paints with a broad stroke, and unfortunately, any response must also be done with a similar blanket statement.
Can I take my own advice the next time that someone writes that 'libraries are dead' article? Who knows, probably not. Rising above when it's something you care about is no easy task. So I won't critique the CBA for giving them both barrels. Both Slayton and Macleans deserve it. At the very least for being intellectually dishonest.
So let me leave you with this. Librarians (painting with a broad stroke here) usually rate pretty high on the trust factor. And let me tell you, lawyers are not rats. Would I be married to one for past 10 years if they were?
[No. wait. Crap. Can't say that. Confidentiality clause in the non-compete premarital something or another contract...] Sorry dear. Happy anniversary, flowers are on the way! ;)
posted by Steve Matthews at 8/23/2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home