Open Mike: 'House' Baker's Dozen Cancelled

["Open Mike" is the Editorial page of the venerable Online
Photographer, a survivor weblog founded in 2005.]

I'm sorry for all of those who submitted work, but the "House" Baker's Dozen is cancelled. An agitated individual has been harassing me over it, and after consulting with several advisors I don't see a neutral way out. This is permanent and not undoable.

For the most part I've been fortunate. I've attracted outstanding readers and commenters. But in any public-facing job you're always liable to attract the random bad egg. In this case, a bully. Or "cyberbully" as the term is now. The bully has been banned, but that hasn't made them go away (I'm avoiding pronouns here). Some of the particulars are, shall we say, concerning: for instance, despite their obsession with it, the person did not actually submit a picture to the Baker's Dozen contest. That's not the only anomaly. Another recent-ish term not of my generation: "WTF?"

Corporate cyberbully
I've been writing about photography since 1988, and this has happened four or five times over the years. The worst was a person who proposed themselves for a feature I used to do called "Random Excellence." I had a policy that I didn't allow people to propose themselves for that feature. I explained that to them, as I had done a number of times before with no issues arising from it. The person went off the deep end, and harassed me with impressive persistence for quite a number of years. I don't know how people can sustain such vindictiveness on the basis of so little offense. But that's their problem. People have their own issues. I know other photo-writers who have had similar experiences.

Another of the very worst for me was a company, believe it or not. And talk about bullying. I wrote one negative sentence about Hasselblad in a review of a competing medium-format camera (admittedly, very snarky—I was trying to be funny, and I get carried away with words sometimes), and Hasselblad launched a vendetta against me that lasted for many years. This was way back in the film era, when Hasselblad was far and away the leading medium-format brand among professionals in North America. So it was a big dog way back then; whereas I was an impoverished art-school graduate living in a two-room walk-up. Not exactly a fair fight. They made concerted attempts to get me fired from the magazine I worked for, enlisted a number of allies to discredit me, and so forth. It went on and on. I didn't keep it, but one result was a multi-page letter from the semi-official Hasselblad booster Ernst Wildi, written to the publisher of the magazine I worked for (that is, he was trying to go over my boss's head). It was remarkable for its vituperation, but also for its mixture of fact with obvious error, because he didn't actually know me or know much about me. So a lot of it consisted of shots fired (er, I almost said "wildly") in the dark. Some landed; some went rather absurdly wide. My editor was very supportive, and got into the habit of screening the reader mail for the kind of diatribes Hasselblad tended to instigate. Most of the mail I got was highly positive, so when she got a letter raking me over the coals and asserting that every word I wrote was as worthless as sand and that personally I was blood kin to the very Devil, she was usually able to uncover a Hasselblad connection. In one case, though, she received a negative letter from a woman who was the President of a company, and she (my editor I mean) called me and told me she couldn't see a Hasselblad connection and that she couldn't simply censor every negative letter about me just because it was negative. So she published it. It turned out that the woman was the President of an advertising agency, and maybe you can guess who one of her clients was.

Anyway, I usually respond to these things by walking away. I responded in that case by simply disqualifying myself from writing about Hasselblads from then on. I figured my objectivity was compromised. In my next life, I might write under a pseudonym.

That is the news. We will have another Baker's Dozen soon.

Mike

Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)

Featured Comments from:

Terry Burnes: "I appreciate this update. I must admit I was wondering what had happened to BD House as it seemed to me that if you ask us to do something for TOP you need to do your part in return and seemed in the past to have done so. Now it's clear that it wasn't neglect on your part or some overall deficiency in our submittals. Just the unpleasant side of the Internet that we usually see little or none of here.

"House was still a useful exercise for me, as are all the BDs. You pull a theme out of your hat and it causes me to review thousands of my photos thinking 'There must be something worthwhile in here' as I struggle to find it. But then something surfaces that clears the bar, if only barely, and confidence returns. Sort of an exercise in self-appraisal that we can all benefit from periodically that I think helps us going forward. So thanks for that."

Peter Williams: "It's bullshit to cancel it. You've taken so long to even mention it since asking for entries."

Mike replies: That's fair. I've been sick, though. I keep mentioning that I've been off my game.

Comments

[James Meeks]

Sounds like someone should get a hobby….oh, maybe they already have one.

[John]

Understandable if unfortunate. Perhaps we can share our submissions? I would not mind seeing others. Here was mine, a house photo I took on a walk on Thanksgiving night in Duluth, MN a few years ago. With a Fuji XH1 and the 23mm F2.

[Daniel]

Why cancel it? Go ahead and you win. Yes, I submitted an image and have been wondering why we have not seen the images. Cancelling due to one scrote does not seem right.

[Tom F.]

I don't understand how someone harassing you about the contest leads to canceling it, nor what you mean by 'a neutral way out.' Perhaps a little more explanation? If not, that's okay; I'm sure there will be another contest sometime.

[I can't really explain it further than I have already. I don't actually know the situation--I mean, how could I? What's the fellow's real motivation? What's his mental state? How deep does his animosity actually go? Is he sane and just pissed off for some reason, or unstable? What would he stoop to for revenge? What might set him off? Why doesn't he just go away if he doesn't like what he finds here? (That's what I would do, and in fact have done.) I have no solid evidence or factual basis to know any of these things. It's a delicate situation and I'm in the dark. But I've had very negative experiences in the past that this one resembles, and that makes me wary. --Mike]

[Rusty]

Mike, no one needs that kind of grief, particularly you, now. This is your house, your rules, we are happy to visit.

[Sal Santamaura]

It's only because you rely on TOP for a livelihood that I don't recommend flipping off everyone and leaving the aggravation behind. May you soon reach a point where Social Security affords sufficient income to do just that. Thanks for all you've written and will write in the future. Take care of your health issues and get well soon.

[Chris Bertram]

Having been in the blogging game for over 20 years, I know these things happen. I think the online world is particularly prone to it because you get people who are just addicted to being permanently connected and an almost indelible archive of e-evidence that can be marshalled in support of someone's obsession. Anyway, I'm sorry that this has happened to you Mike, particularly on top of other troubles. TOP is a valuable service and most of us appreciate what you do.

[Robert Roaldi]

Maybe you're more important than you think you are and that's why they go after you.

Looking at it from the other side, a company can find itself in hell on earth because some random stranger on the web criticized them and it went viral.

[Jeff Hohner]

Thanks for the update. I always appreciate you sharing how the sausage is made. From past posts I learned how moderating comments could be arduous, but I had never thunk about your exposure to wackos. I guess this just shows how good your moderation is. You shield us from the crazy. A rare and precious thing on the Internet.

[Honestly, it's not that bad. Aside from this situation, it's been a long time since I've disallowed a single comment. I did have to edit a few recently, but the commenters didn't complain and I think they know why I did it and didn't mind.

I also check older comments from people whose comments I'm considering editing or deleting. If they have a history of good (friendly/helpful/thoughtful) comments, I give them more leeway. Sometimes I find I've misinterpreted something someone wrote, or jumped to a conclusion.

I remember one quite funny situation. A guy started commenting who was picking fights with other commenters. I worked with him for a while, via email, explaining that I don't allow insults, arguing, fighting, hostile back-and-forth, etc. Finally, he said something like, "But I LIKE to fight! That's why I get on the internet! If you're not going to let me fight, then I'M LEAVING!"

And I typed back, "bye."

Haven't seen him since! :-D --Mike]

[Ronny Nilsen]

I read a research article somewhere that the trolls on the net usually also are jerks in real life, and that the real people around them also think they are jerks. So no need to feel that you have been singled out by a troll.

And do not feed the trolls by acknowledging them. That will only make matters worse.

[Michael]

Those that have criticized you for “giving in” don’t understand what it means to be harassed online and I understand why you just said forget it. They don’t understand that you do this because you like to do it and not for their benefit and a chance to be published on your site.

For your next dozen, I suggest including something to the effect that you will get it done when you do, anyone who contacts you about it will be disqualified.

[Joseph L. Kashi]

I certainly agree with the comment that it's your house, hence your rules.

It's unfortunate that these sort of situations happen seemingly more frequently as the Internet more easily allows pseudonymic or anonymous postings where people to spew forth with little personal consequence.

It's interesting that someone baldly announced that they like to fight and hence to troll, insult, and start fights. That's unfortunate, much too common, and rather "mental". My psychologist wife terms it "just crazy".

That would seem especially so regarding the person who did not even submit anything and hence doesn't even have standing to complain about an action that didn't even occur. It sounds like the sort of person who would be prone to randomly harassing strangers.

Kirk Tuck has also written about similar experiences writing his excellent blog. Comment moderation is tedious but definitely important in terms of maintaining a blog where people enjoy interacting. Thank you!

FWIW - I've been a trial lawyer for over 45 years and it's very clear that life is much more productive and pleasant when people sit down and solve misunderstandings and disputes in a civil manner, with a bit of patience, rather than exorcising their internal demons by spewing vituperation upon the rest of society.

About 98% of cases settle before trial, and that's how it should work. You can extrapolate to at least one of the parties in the 2% that do go to trial. A forensic psychologist who worked for the CA court system told me that such people are often those who get their kicks making life miserable for others so that they can feel personally important or superior.

[David]

I went years thinking that the company I worked for did ‘bad things’. Then I realized the ‘company’ did no such thing. People at the company, working for the company, did bad things. I think there would probably have been just a single person at Hasselblad responsible for your harassment, operating either on self motivation or under direction, pulling all the levers they can.

[True, and I know who it was. I could say lots more, but I won't. --Mike]

[Alan Berkson]

Don't really what you say can be true. How does anybody keep you from posting? Explanation or I'm out of here!

[It's my judgment that this is the best way to handle this. After much thought and consideration. --Mike]

[dan meyers]

Given the number of times you have written about the fragile income this blog provides to you it's very off-putting and unprofessional to make a public ask and then not follow through on your plan. Doesn't bode well for keeping me (and maybe others) around for long.

[John L Gordon]

Thanks, Mike, for the update. As someone who submitted a photo, I had been wondering about the delay, and I am so sorry to hear that you have to experience something like this from a simple call for photo submissions. And a good call not to proceed. I want to thank you for the opportunity to submit as it gave me an unexpected opportunity to dwell on personal grief associated with a photo I took in my small hometown in Georgia, in 1974, on a site I revisited last year. I put the photo and my commentary on both FaceBook and Instagram if anyone is interested: http://tinyurl.com/OldHouseFB

https://www.instagram.com/p/Czsh_nfPRt6/

[Peter Barnes]

Perhaps you could remind your readers that the reason we are here, and some of us pay you a pittance for the privilege, (Sorry. About the alliteration I mean. OK, also for the size of the pittance) is that we want to read what you choose to write. I don't think you have ever said "follow my blog for the chance to have your photographer ego stroked by submitting your photos"

Changing announced plans about the Baker's Dozen is far from a breach of contract in my humble opinion. And I had submitted a masterpiece that was SURE to be in the top 13 of House!

[Roger Bradbury]

Before I moved I was harassed for years by my next door neighbour, aided by the connivance of the local council. So I can see why you do not want the aggravation of dealing with this cyberbully.

I think the best thing for you to do is to announce another Baker's Dozen as soon as you can. Remember, nil illegitimi carborundum!

[Christian]

This is kind of funny!
I was actually thinking to participate in this baker's dozen with this picture:

But I was not sure, if it would really fit, as it is not a "house" as such, but a museum.
So now, I do not really need to care and inspired by John's comment above, I simply post it here.
It it definitely a wonderful building (National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic), heavily restored in 2019 and beautifully illuminated.
Enjoy and have a good Sunday!

[Nigel Voak]

I am sorry that you have had this bizzarre problem, with something quite innocent like a photo contest.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of mental illness bobbing around the internet, which I guess is the perfect medium for these sad sick people, safely hidden behind a keyboard.

I had a little problem with a guy on the DPR forum. He wrote a post complaining that his camera broke down after shooting 18,000 shots in an afternoon. A civil reply that using the motor-drive a bit more selectively might be a good solution. A couple of replies finished with him wishing me a slow death from cancer.

This was pretty much his style, and the Mods, at DPR seemed to tolerate this stuff. I was told to mind my own buisness when I asked them why he was still allowed to post on the forum.

But if you follow any big forum for a while, thre are lots of these unpleasant behaviors to be seen.

[Lothar Adler]

Dear Mr. Johnston, you have proven over several decades that you conduct your public writing work both in print media and in your blog at a very high content, cultural, strategic, human level. You are even very generous in making your knowledge available to us for free.
In my eyes, you deserve the utmost respect and a very high leap of faith. You are under no obligation to your readers to provide detailed background information on your strategic decisions, let alone to seek approval for your decisions.
It's your blog, your rules of the game. Actually, this situation should be self-evident to any civilized reader.
I send you my best wishes and much strength from Germany.

[Arg]

Wow, that’s terrible, Mike. Commiserations.

But the unsympathetic comments on your decision to cancel are especially disappointing. The last thing you need at this particular point is further criticism.

Chin up. Good times around the corner. Live for them.

[Vijay]

What Lother Adler and Terry Burnes said. I don’t like repeating what’s already been said, but am doing it to let you know there is at least one more grateful reader who holds their POVs.

[Stan B.]

Was wondering why the prolonged delay, figured it was due to your recent 'unwellness,' and just decided it would happen when it happens- especially since over the years, I've learned one shouldn't be in any particular hurry to be rejected. I just kinda cringe thinking this bully got away spoiling everyone's day. Wanna say ya shouldn't have caved, but am mindful that all my confrontations with bullies have not always fared well either...

[JOHN GILLOOLY]

What is wrong with people!? Mike, I appreciate you and your writing and this blog are enriching to my life in some small way. We don't pay a membership. You OWE us nothing. Even if we send in money to support your efforts, you owe us nothing. I get that someone might be disappointed if they submitted an image for a Bakers Dozen and it never materialized, but upset to the point of threatening you? Calling it bullshit? It's so unfortunate that you have to put up with that nonsense. You didn't charge an entry fee! It's a fun contest. My best to you and your health!

[Dave Morris]

To use a phrase from the Peanuts gang: Good grief!

So sorry you were subjected to this, Mike. I was really looking forward to seeing the submissions for this one (and it was the first for which I'd struck up the courage to join!) but I can completely understand why it's had to end this way.

Another time, perhaps!

[Guy Perkins]

I can only echo what John Gillooly and many others have written. Your blog is a (free) oasis of enlightened commentary, full of humour, insight and knowledge. Your main duty is to look after your physical and mental health Mike, so please carry on doing just that.

[David Dyer-Bennet]

Sad! And sorry you had to deal with the abuse, and make this choice.