Among the hundreds of emails I go through in a week, most are forgettable, but some are amusing, a few memorable.
I am grateful to several retired friends who forward jokes and funny cartoons--most of the time since they tend to be tasteful and not insulting.
This past week, the "joke" forwarded involved racist humor that no doubt amused the sender. I responded to the sender, asking him not to forward offensive material. He responded with an apology that said, in effect, "I'm not responsible; I just pass 'em on."
But the one who passes them on presumably reads them and approves of them and likes them well enough to share them, even if the material denigrates minorities in stereotyped ways that are unfunny. Doesn't the one who forwards a bit of humor or political satire via email have a responsibility to screen the material he or she passes on? Those who use the internet have some moral obligations, it seems to me. . . .
This happens about once or twice a year, with the same response from and to me. What else can I do but object? Ninety-percent of the material these people send me is good, and I know they're decent folks.
The second email this week worth commenting on was totally welcome and worth forwarding. It includes at little known (to me) episode in the life of Walt Disney. He was fired from one of his first jobs working for a Missouri newspaper because he lacked imagination!
Irony of ironies. Moral: assume those who criticize you are fools until proven otherwise.