Shush!
Related Content
More About
Enjoyed the Music Quarterly [3/16]. Amused by your use of the old saw, "If it's too loud, you're too old." My take on that theme would read more along the lines of, "The less one has to say, the louder one tends to say it."
RICHARD THURSTON
SEATTLE
WE seem irresponsible?
Mark Driver's mocking, in-your-face (ear) article on the folly of using earplugs ["The worst plug," 3/16] reminded me of an incident that occurred some 30 years ago. Under the influence of mescaline, in those heady hippie days, I attended an indoor rock concert and in order to REALLY experience those groovy sound waves, I placed my ear directly ON the face of one of the band's speakers and stood there for a half-hour FEELING the sound vibes. Being young and stupid, I had no idea I might damage my hearing. For a day or so afterwards, voices sounded as though they were coming from a radio ill-tuned . . . scratchy, staticky, garbled. But sound went back to normal after another day . . . or so I thought.
Next week I am going to an audiologist for tinnitus, a constant loud ringing in my ears, as well as for significant hearing loss in the conversational range. Had I known better, I might not have been so reckless in my treatment of a precious commodity—hearing, when I grooved out on that speaker one night long ago.
Your printing of that article seemed to me irresponsible.
WENDY JOHN
SEATTLE
Noise destroys (sense of humor)!
Funny, I used to believe featured writers require some form of education to be allowed to have their story in print, obviously I was mistaken. As I write a response regarding your article regarding earplugs ["The worst plug," 3/16], it is at some reluctance. After all, as my husband the businessman points out, this article increases my job security as an audiologist. If they truly take this information to heart, I should be seeing an increase in my hearing aid patient load in approximately five years. There are few absolutes in the world and especially in the medical field but there is one in audiology—noise destroys! The extent and repercussions may vary. Some may only have constant tinnitus, others a hearing loss severe enough to lose their job or eventually limit their communication, and, of course, impair their ability to enjoy the fine mix of loud music the author so nicely referred to in his article, but there will be damage.
[It] should be noted . . . that as technology improves, the level of amplification increases. Therefore the artists Driver mentioned, did not necessarily wear hearing protection five years ago, but if you look closely, more are wearing it now because they must due to the increased sound level. It could mean their job if they don't. To a musician, or anyone else who appreciates music, damage to their hearing distorts the delicate balance between pitches. Obviously Driver is neither a musician, nor knowledgeable about music. Take away all the of the switches on his stereo except the bass and he would probably not notice the difference.
So I guess in retrospect, I should thank you for printing his column. You've just ensured my job security for many years to come.
L. WILKINSON, CLINICAL AUDIOLOGIST
Jesus H. Christ!
The Seattle Times might want to kill the P-I [see "Start the presses! 3/9], but it doesn't want to offend anyone. Humor columnist Dave Barry, in his March 6 column, quoted former major leaguer John Blanchard saying "Oh Lord God." Seattle subscribers wouldn't know that because the Times changed the quote to "Oh boy." I queried Michael Fancher about the change, who replied by e-mail:
"Yes, we did make that change in Dave Barry's column that ran March 6. We follow a very careful policy with any use of God or Lord or anything that can be construed as profanity (as we do with all rough language). We ask questions like, is it essential to telling the story, does it convey as we can in no other way convey what the story needs to say. If it's just casual, like 'My God' used as punctuation as it is so often heard in conversation these days, we will omit it or rewrite it. There is a segment of our readership quite sensitive to the casual use of God, and we honor that, as we do other readers' sensitivity to ethnic or racial slurs."
You would have to read the column to appreciate how changing the quote ruined the humor. Not to mention the journalistic sin of changing a direct quote. What concerns me is the one paper we will probably end up with is more worried about not offending its readers than journalistic integrity. Is it possible to publish a good newspaper without offending someone? Apparently the Times is going to try.
BOB KINGSBERY
MILL CREEK
Factual error astounds!
Nina Shapiro's article about the SPEEA strike, "The next generation" [3/9], contains a factual error so astounding that I'll never again be able to take her seriously as a journalist. Shapiro states, "The last real technological revolution in aerospace was about 35 years ago, when the jet engine replaced the propeller system and produced the massive 747."
