wow. I'm glad there was an article. Are you the author OP? If not it's clear the author was a UBer.
I wish the article had reported on the sites springing up to preserve the community so other people could find us.
I wonder if there was a statement from CBS that they would not preserve the archives or if that's inference.
Also apologies if you are the author but I found the take in the more editorial paragraphs really disjointed. why not just report without a tacked on meaningless editorial opinion about.. what? human need? social services? what is even being expressed?
I must have missed Lobster Mom. That's a wild story.
The article was a bit harsh. UB was never meant to be a site for social activism. There are other sites that meet that need. UB provided a place for "emotional release". And there's nothing wrong with that.
OP: I agree. I wanted to comment on the article, but I'm not a Washington Post subscriber. Yes, it would be great if mothers could organize online to lobby for affordable childcare or paid maternity leave (while working full-time and doing all the housework and raising our needy, demanding kids without any social safety net). But that's not what UB was about, and that's okay.
Very interesting. I think the author of the piece was trying to grasp at a larger social meaning, but at its core, it was a community of moms who offered support, reality checks, humor and advice. And we often commented on the problems with too many kids for too few spots at school and ways that parents could have an impact or make their voices heard. The writer fails to mention that as soon as posts became in any way controversial (which happens when you're discussing issues, solutions and problems), the posts were removed. Whatever UB was or was trying to become, in the last year, it become much lighter-weight.
I think this article is way off. It in no way acknowledges how much UB advice and interaction meant to most of us, instead claiming it failed at a purpose for which it was never intended ( to change the world). This reporter really missed the story, and misrepresented it.
Terribly disappointing read, and I happen to agree with the author's politics. If she wanted to write an article about the failure of upper middle class parents to affect needed societal change (and even cite to urbanbaby discussions as evidence that we are all wasting our time kvetching instead of turning our angst into some meaningful action) that could have made for a good article. But it would in no way, shape, or form have been an article about the end of urbanbaby or even about the life of urbanbaby. She should have written the article she wanted to write and someone else should have eulogized UB!
wow. I'm glad there was an article. Are you the author OP? If not it's clear the author was a UBer.
I wish the article had reported on the sites springing up to preserve the community so other people could find us.
I wonder if there was a statement from CBS that they would not preserve the archives or if that's inference.
Also apologies if you are the author but I found the take in the more editorial paragraphs really disjointed. why not just report without a tacked on meaningless editorial opinion about.. what? human need? social services? what is even being expressed?
OP: No, I'm not the author, although I am quoted in the article! Anonymously, of course.
wait, OP, are you lobster mom?
OP: Haha, I wish!
Interesting article. Thanks for posting OP.
I must have missed Lobster Mom. That's a wild story.
The article was a bit harsh. UB was never meant to be a site for social activism. There are other sites that meet that need. UB provided a place for "emotional release". And there's nothing wrong with that.
OP: I agree. I wanted to comment on the article, but I'm not a Washington Post subscriber. Yes, it would be great if mothers could organize online to lobby for affordable childcare or paid maternity leave (while working full-time and doing all the housework and raising our needy, demanding kids without any social safety net). But that's not what UB was about, and that's okay.
Very interesting. I think the author of the piece was trying to grasp at a larger social meaning, but at its core, it was a community of moms who offered support, reality checks, humor and advice. And we often commented on the problems with too many kids for too few spots at school and ways that parents could have an impact or make their voices heard. The writer fails to mention that as soon as posts became in any way controversial (which happens when you're discussing issues, solutions and problems), the posts were removed. Whatever UB was or was trying to become, in the last year, it become much lighter-weight.
I think this article is way off. It in no way acknowledges how much UB advice and interaction meant to most of us, instead claiming it failed at a purpose for which it was never intended ( to change the world). This reporter really missed the story, and misrepresented it.
+1 agree the reporter missed the story
But thanks so much for posting the link, appreciate that you gave us the opportunity to read and comment!
Terribly disappointing read, and I happen to agree with the author's politics. If she wanted to write an article about the failure of upper middle class parents to affect needed societal change (and even cite to urbanbaby discussions as evidence that we are all wasting our time kvetching instead of turning our angst into some meaningful action) that could have made for a good article. But it would in no way, shape, or form have been an article about the end of urbanbaby or even about the life of urbanbaby. She should have written the article she wanted to write and someone else should have eulogized UB!
This.
100%