Dear Michael -- First, belated happy birthday! Second, imagine what a sad life that critic must have that he can't feel and empathize with the love and pride of a father who cares about his family as much as you do. Keep bringing your world into mine, my brother. I keep learning from you, and I value all the lessons. Always have! Best -- Jess in Las Cruces, NM :-)

I heard your commentary this morning on how you focused on the only negative remark expressed by a listener and, apparently, gave it more weight and prominence than the hundreds of congratulatory responses. Your remarks reminded me of an interesting and revealing experience I had years ago:

Interestingly, it appears to be The Human Condition that we need 100% approval and acceptance --- and question our integrity if only a single individual in the crowd feels otherwise. Many years ago, my wife and I went to a theater performance about the plight and the prejudice directed towards Sansei --- third generation Japanese-Americans --- as a result of Japan’s involvement in WWII. We were touched by this moving performance and went backstage to congratulate and embrace the actors (all were Sansei). After sharing how impressed and moved we were, the principal actor thanked us cordially and then showed us a letter that he posted on the bulletin board backstage for all to read. The letter was scathing in its remarks about how this prejudice in the United States toward the Sansei would, presumably, have been avoided had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor. (The letter was disgusting and denigrating, which is to put it mildly.) I responded to the actor how touched we were by their moving performance and their pain. And, by the positive reaction and standing ovation by most all in attendance, the feeling was overwhelmingly mutual. Why post this single negative letter out of countless positive ones received over the course of dozens of performances? I shared with him that I am an offspring of Holocaust survivors and can identify with the pain and suffering that many went through as a result of WWII. Although we should never forget such atrocities (to paraphrase the great Elie Wiesel), the letter’s author was completely inappropriate in his lack of sensitivity and understanding. I told him that, granted, there will always be a few people that can be so abrasive and distasteful. However, it is sad that the troupe chose to post this single hateful missive out of all the positive, congratulatory letters. Why focus on the one (apparently) flawed individual instead of countless others who had only praise and tears to share --- most of whom were not of Japanese linage?

I, too, have a similar character "defect," in that I will focus on the single individual in the audience who dozes off during lectures that I present to hundreds of otherwise inspired attendees --- all of whom chose to attend on their own volition. I suspect that this is a trait we all have --- to be loved and accepted by all, yet, allow our confidence to be shaken by even a single negative reaction. Think of our President: How can he guide our country if he focused on the tens of million voters that expressed their disapproval at the ballot box (not just a single person!) instead of on the majority of citizens that placed him in office? There is a Turkish saying (if I may paraphrase) that every beautiful piece of art has a flaw, which is symbolic of the fact that we need to realize that we’re human in the context of the universe and always have room to improve ourselves and the need to be humble. However, in the case of that single condescending letter, I would suggest that the writer was overwhelmingly flawed, not the reader.

Perhaps, it may be appropriate to imagine a scale, with the single negative response on one side, and, all the positive responses on the other. Granted, there is a lesson to be learned from each and every response. Yet, all else being equal, and, assuming that there is no inherent bias in the feedback, the results speak for themselves. Please continue to present your commentaries as you have all these years, Mr. Josephson. As you stated, experiences that provide you with ideas and insight for your commentaries can be gleaned from your own family’s interactions, with whom you are most familiar. As challenging as it may be, I’d look at how the scale tilts and act on its collective result!

No, Mr. Josephson, I certainly would not want you to “lose your authenticity,” whatever that might mean. And perhaps my criticism was unnecessarily “mean-spirited” (for which I apologize). But I really think that given your extraordinary opportunity to communicate with audiences as sophisticated and educated as those in southern California, you squander the chance to produce a first-class act.

Your simplistic, cornpone style grates on the nerves—as you serve up baby talk more suitable for the Reader’s Digest or the sermons of Norman Vincent Peale than for citizens of our complex world. I, for one, don’t want to achieve any kind of personal intimacy with you or your family. But I would welcome waking up in the morning to adult commentary about substantive ethical issues. Let some of your staff members write or deliver commentary. Invite a guest to speak. Your program would have more impact if it were not so much a “one man show.”

Compromise is not necessarily a “crooked path.” Willingness to change one’s mind, the ability to resist stubbornness, and yes, the fine art of compromise—all these are attributes of good character sadly lacking in today’s politics, society, and personal relationships.

Now before you and your loyal listeners speculate further about what a terrible person I must be, let me make just one request: please give me a smidgen of credit for having gotten your attention!

Dear Michael, I find your commentaries absolutely invaluable. I have a daily ezine myself which goes to over 100,000 subscribers worldwide. My goal (by the grace of God) is to be a truth teller and never a people pleaser. When I write on "touchy topics" I always receive negative criticisms as well as words of encouragement. I don't like the negative comments but I like to consider any value in them and realize that in our work criticism is par for the course. In a little twist to the old cliche, "Thems that can does while thems that can't criticize." There is some truth in this.

Mr. Brock,

It's curious that the end of your note seeks to deflect any reaction to your sincere but thoroughly unkind and perhaps self-righteous critique of my commentaries with the suggestion that you should get some credit for getting my attention. There are lots of ways to get attention, including personal invective. But I also answer many of the supportive and encouraging notes I receive.

I'm not surprised or even offended that you find my 90-second commentaries (that's how much time I'm allowed) simplistic or cornpone. Your reaction is personal and sincere and your opinion is as valid as any other. My question is: why was it so important for you to state this opinion? Why was it worth your time to demean my work and insult my family? (Your reference to my "insufferable daughters" was especially low.) What pleasure do you derive from telling your personal truth in a way and in a context that can only cause pain?

I am not suggesting you are a terrible person for writing letters designed to put me in my rightful place. Perhaps you are surrounded by a mutually supportive network of friends, but I do suspect I am not the only victim of your judgmental derision. If expressing yourself so harshly is gratifying to you and a matter of integrity, I urge you to follow your authentic self.

However, for others who might read this exchange, I would respectfully submit that it is more satisfying and fulfilling to build than to tear down.

Though I shudder at the thought, I am quite sure there are many others who share your view (though I doubt they would be subscribers to my newsletter). In any event, we printed your letter to stimulate response, and I call to your attention the fascinating letter from David (Dr. David Pepper, a physics professor) posted above your response. He is eloquent about the toxic impact folks like you can have.

You are, I presume, a very well-educated guy and you have a right to satisfy your craving for high-level intellectual stimulation. I don't disdain or begrudge that. As a professor of law at several prominent law schools, I spent 20 years in the groves of academe both digesting and dispensing higher-order philosophical commentary. But that's not what I set out to do in these commentaries.

More than 10 years ago, KNX gave me the privilege to write and speak on any topic I wish. I have chosen to use that time talking about things that matter to me and about thoughts I have on the world — not to educate people about grad school-level philosophy, but to reach their hearts and minds about the nature and importance of a good life.

What is banal to you has been of value to others. In addition to what I'm told is an extensive and loyal listenership on KNX, Armed Forces Radio and other stations, nearly 80,000 people subscribe to my newsletter.

This does not make you wrong but it does demonstrate that there are other people — some as smart as you — whose viewpoints are entitled to as much respect as yours. Your remarks show disrespect for them as well as me.

It's pointless for me to engage in further discourse with you, but I invite readers to offer their perspectives.

Respectfully,

Michael Josephson

My response to the person who wrote "Hitler, Lenin, and Saddam Hussein were men of immense character . . . that counted for nothing." it counted for something, it changed history!

I am a new subscriber to the web site - I have young children who I am constantly striving to provide with information about ethical behavior. I have learned that my emphasis in life on character and ethics is the result of my focus on relationships - nothing else really is of value to me. Perhaps this is simplistic - or lacks sophistication - I certainly have the educational background to pursue other issues. I have found that relationships have provided me with the most joy versus other pursuits. If I have learned one thing during my life of being a caregiver it is that not everyone is going to understand or appreciate my focus - and so Mr. Brock, not everyone will understand your comments. Unfortunately, the majority of any audience has not spent as much time or energy on the complex reasons for the lack of integrity or character - so simplicity may be the answer. Stating the obvious repetitively, in simple, relationship focused comments may be a beginning to the discussion. It will work for some and grate on the nerves of others. That is what always is a delight in life - how unique we all are.

I so much agree with you regarding at looking at others' criticism to see if there is any truth in what is being said. In this case, though, what he said was just plain mean with an intent to hurt. This is not the same as criticism.

Please keep in mind that if you change to accommodate this person you may lose the rest of us! I think your 'following' love the fact that you use real everyday life situations and struggles that we have to face. I myself am not that interested in the 'elite' philosophers he mentions i.e. Kierkegaard, Buber, or Tillich unless you do to make a point that affects us in our day-to-day lives.

I do not understand why he listens to you - no one is forcing him to listen to that channel. If he does not enjoy the show, he can listen to another station. You cannot please everyone - the cynical people in particular, I think, find people like you who is out there making a difference - it is like putting acid on a wound - to agree with you would be making their world view wrong. Personally, I think you should feel sorry for this person.

Mr. Brock is obviously a long time debator. Someone who throws out an arguement simply to get a response for a debate.While I believe that there is a time and place for debate, I do not see why people throw out hate and discontention just to get a forum. Personally, I feel that he lost the debate in this instance... he can always change the channel if he doesn't want to hear you. The fact that he does listen means that he must not disapprove too terribly much.

Let's throw this out for the debate... I hate the sound of fingernails scraping on a blackboard. If someone is doing that in a room that I am in, I will walk out of the room to avoid being tortured anymore. Is there anyone that would stay just to see how long the person would continue to scrape that board??

I also would like to thank you for ALL of your commentaries. When the survey came out a while ago that you were thinking of not putting in your quotes with the rest I wrote in right away and wanted your quotes to remain. This is your web site and I want to hear from you. People like J. Brook are very narrow minded, and if he doesn't like your comments why does he continue to read them? From his letter he seems very informed as to what you say. I also agree that the message "plants the seed" and most people learn from experience either their's or what someone else has gone through. That is why so many women share stories about relationships, raising kids and life situations. Keep up the good work and I wish I could remember a quote here but perhaps you will find it somewhere, it went something like this...Don't let people's compliments or complaints touch you because those compliments and complaints change with the wind.

Mr. Brock,
I have given your comment much consideration, and you have indeed gotten my attention. The attention was not necessarily favorable.

Mr. Josephson's program is what it is, and is appreciated by a wide audience. If you prefer a more... overly erudite forum to listen to, you could always change the channel or not read the articles. Bashing someone (and I do use the word bashing on purpose because neither of your letters contained CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, but simply an unwillingness to "compromise" on your own listening standards) because they do not cater to your particular, and individual, wishes for entertainment is not what I would call good character either.

My response to J. Brock would have to be...if you don't appreciate the messages given by Mr. Josephson by all means listen to another radio station. We all have choices to make. Why are you choosing to spend your time criticizing the efforts of someone who is beloved by so many? Why not just accept that others enjoy what you do not and live and let live.

Personally, I value Mr. Josephson's commentaries for many of the same reasons that you seem to despise them. My life is complex and I am bombarded by negative images and messages on a daily basis. I appreciate being reminded of the simple things in life that are so sweet and fulfilling. I need to be prompted to take a moment to consider how basic human interaction can enrich my life, rather than complicating it. I am well-educated and have a fast-paced, highly-rewarding career in higher education, but I find that I am soothed by bringing my brain out of the ivory tower and pondering the fundamental elements that make our lives beautiful.

While I cannot directly relate to all of Mr. Josephson's commentaries (for example, it will be many years before I turn 65), I can connect with his messages because he uses stories from his life to help me to do so. This is a long-standing tool employed by educators, politicians, authors, and many others.

In short, I acknowledge that J. Brock did indeed get my attention. In fact, I thank him for stirring in me the need to write this e-mail because it gives me the opportunity to say thank you to Michael Josephson and to encourge him to continue forward in his mission. Looking past J. Brock's vitriolic comments, he does have some suggestions that he believes would improve Mr. Josephson's commentaries, I feel certain that these recommendations will be given due consideration; however, I, for one, would not change a thing.

Michael,

Throughout our lives we get input that is both positive and negative. It can only change us if we choose to grant the person giving it authority. As the majority of your listeners/readers obviously believe you're doing a great job and not using your personal life and your daughters to build your ego but instead to build closer personal relationships with us your listeners/readers you might want to deny the one irrational criticism any authority in your mind or in your column. Ever since I heard you speak at the DBIA convention, I have been an avid reader. You have improved my life and that of my family. I'm proud of my two daughters, too!

Keep up the great work. Our country needs it!
Craig

Mr. Josephson,

I have been a faithful reader and admirer of yours for many years. I can relate to your feelings shared in your article, "To Thine Self Be True". While constructive criticism is a tool that can be used as a means of self-evaluation and/or reflection,unkind remarks of any kind are not productive and only cause feelings of anger and/or hurt.

Whenever I feel like I'm being unfairly criticized or targeted, I recite a quote by Sister Kenny, "Anyone who angers you, conquers you."

Keep up the good work!

To a certain extent that may be true. For if you encounter an individual who was drunk or otherwise not in his right mind, you would pay little attetion. Sometimes you run accross the person who thins you're working too hard and it is exposing the fact that he is lazy etc...However, in the words of The Apostle Paul, "I am not aware of anything against myself", (1Co 4:4) we must not forget that we cannot ever see ourselves as others do. The obvious danger is when we begin to throw aside the comments of others without giving consideration to the fact that there may be some merrit to them. That is not to say that is what you are doing here. There is truth in humor, and in criticism. A person who is negative will bring to light faults in the most hurtful way possible, but it does not mean that the point made doesn't have some truth to it. I guess my point is, that in order to grow, we need pruning once and a while. Sometimes there is a need to adjust our view of ourselves and perceived self worth. A need to be reminded that our opinions are just that, opinions. Whatever the indivisuals reason for saying what he did was, we may never know. After all, motive is everything. Maybe he was a well meaning person, or perhaps he was jealous. Either way, his opinion is equal to yours, because it is just that, an opinion. I may not be bothered by your family references, but others may be. It doesn't make any of us right or wrong. The question is your motive in bringing them up. Is it because you're self righteous? Is it because you're proud of them? Or is it that you never realized that you're bringing them into your commentary could irritate someone else? We'll never know. (I'm not attempting to assign any motives to what you do) We need to step back and ask ourselves, "what is the reason behind what I'm doing?" Pride can be like termites. It's never a good thing to find out you have them, but it's always better to find out sooner than later. Sometimes, what we are told exposes the termites. We're left with a choice. Try only to kill the few we find, or dig deeper to make sure that there aren't any more. All of us should welcome any criticism we receive, take a genuine look at it's merrit, and use it to better ourselves. Even if it serves to remind us that what we do, however well intentioned, could still irritate or bother others.
Thank you for your commenaries. For the record, your family references don't bother me. I don't think you perceive yourself in a self righteous manner. But, that is after all - my opinion.

As your Six Pillars of Character indicate, on must be fair and I think the comment by Mr Brock about an audiences as sophisticated and educated as those in southern California leads me to believe he thinks there is something special about those Californians that I do not believe exist. The world is full of sophisticated and educated people who enjoy you and what does education or sophistication count for anyway if someone lacks character.

The fact that your disgruntled listner wishes you to recite some writing by Kierkegaard is very telling. If your program (which blesses so many of us) bothers him, he should just turn down the volume, or switch to another station. I think even Kierkegaard would approve.
Keep up the good work and don't let the jerks in life rob you of your joy!

Happy Belated Birthday, Michael!

Never doubt that the way you have chosen to live your life and devote yourself to making this world a better place will be the legacy that will remain long after you leave this world (which will be a very long time from now since you are only 40!). I hope that the outpouring of respect and affirmation you are receiving in the wake of such an unmerited personal attack will give you the true sense how much your life is influencing others towards goodness.

Thank you, Mr. Josephson, for taking time to respond directly to my criticism of your program. Some years ago I wrote a note to KNX criticizing “Character Counts,” and the station’s management responded by telling me that the feedback they receive about your program is overwhelmingly positive. If one can judge by the responses posted on this forum, the public still loves you. So congratulations on pleasing the majority and making people feel good about themselves—if that’s your mission!

Yes, I sometimes am something of a rabble-rouser, but I have found that my provocative questioning of the status quo almost always causes people to think deeply and usually results in the creation of something positive. I do not view life as a popularity contest. (I often think of Ibsen’s classic play, “An Enemy of the People,” whose argument seems to be, at least in part, that the public usually “gets it wrong.”)

Again, I apologize for my comments being taken as hurtful.

As to why I don’t just “change the channel” since your show irks me—well, my clock radio is set so that I can catch the 7 a.m. CBS “Morning News Round-Up” on KNX, and “Character Counts” is lined up immediately before it. So avoiding the tail end of your show is hard for me to do! Your words are the first words I hear upon waking in the morning. And what can I say?—they annoy me. However, since my suggestions for improving your show have not been well received, I’ll settle for trying to adjust my wake-up call with a bit more precision.

In the meantime, lighten up, Happy Birthday! and Season’s Greetings!

I've sat back and waited for Mr. Brock's final "hit and run" comments. Okay, so now we're all sweetness and light. Amazing that he couldn't resist the last dagger twist neatly tucked in there. "Lighten up..." I wonder why Mr. Brock seems to think Someone has appointed him to make people think and/or see "the truth"? Hmmmm....

The benefit to your readers is obvious. I think that your critic is critical because he doesn't get the message- which is a truth that you are wanting to share because it is inspiring you. We, the listeners, catch and hold on to your inspiration. However, your motives may be more dubious. You may, through much soul searching, come to believe that it is for the purpose of affirmation and prestige that you share your stories. Either way, we the listeners are inspired. But I believe in in my heart that you speak the stories out of a love for others, and that it comes from genuinely benevolent intentions, no matter how good it feels to you. In case you need a little reminder, remember this truth that it is written that it is more blessed to give than receive. Thank you for being true to your self for we are all the beneficiaries of your giving, your inpiration, and your life. Sincerely, Mark in Pasaden California

Jim Brock makes me laugh! What appropriate timing to have a "Scrooge" email around the holidays. I imagine that he has a good argument for why a beautiful blue sky is "too bright" among other glass-half-empty points of view. Don't we all know someone like this? I must say that the original comments seem to have been intended to insult Mr. Josephson, not to make him "think deeply". Let's call a spade a spade.

The quote "To thine own self be true", doesn't fit with your character counts theme. I thought you were encouraging "us" to be true to the truth. If someone doesn't like you and what you say, O K. Because that person still needs to know the truth and your example may someday lead them to what the truth is: the beauty lies in the idea that we don't control others thoughts and understanding,they choose.