Opinionated About

Accidental Hedonist and here

Ed, I think you’re misreading us. While I don’t know the two young ladies who proposed the first code, they make it very clear that their intentions are honorable. And Steven, or “Fat Guy” as the eGullet community calls him, has proposed a less strict code of his own and is likewise quite clear. Neither insist that everyone adopt it, and in fact all three state that that’s not their intent, but that it is to offer it up for those “who want to demonstrate that they hold themselves to a higher standard”. And that’s where the problem comes in – whatever their intentions, by simple virtue of how they propose the codes, by default they designate those who don’t adopt it as being of lesser standards.

Yes, I realize they don’t say that, it’s not a law, it’s not a requirement, and nobody’s going to force us to adopt it. But it’s a natural human reaction to read about a blogging code of ethics and see that many have adopted it and others not, and some are displaying a “code of ethics” badge and others not. The casual internet surfer isn’t going to take the time to read through all the commentary, back and forth, and dissenting opinions. They’re going to make the assumption that it IS the code for those with higher standards, and choose their sites accordingly. It’s what people do.

And on eGullet, there are already those talking about the use of media and peer pressure to get those who aren’t following the code to fall in line – and indeed the mainstream media will back them up – the NY Times has already had two Diners Journal posts in less than a week hailing the advent of these codes, the Village Voice picked up the story, the Guardian UK has a discussion going on it, and they’re not alone among the press. This is something that many professional food writers and restaurant critics have been fantasizing about – a chance to hold bloggers to the same standards that bloggers hold them to. And I don’t think it’s really ignorable. If we’re all lucky, in my opinion anyway, it’ll all simply fizzle out and go away. But I’m not holding my breath that it will.

This kind of thing always kills me. Somebody proposes an idea for a standard or some kind of code, and everybody thinks it’s an attempt to suppress everyone under some kind of biblical decree or something. (The 1990s were insane with that kind of stuff during the era of PC fascism.) Lighten up! It’s just a purely optional model of good behavior.

At least for now. No doubt some of its proponents will get bent out of shape and go too far with it. I hope not.