Response from Steve Forbes on the "Don't Marry Career Women" Article

In all fairness, I must post the response I received after sending an email to Forbes and posting the link on my blog.

My original email sent on August 28, 2006:

"Dear Forbes,
I read your site and from time to time your magazine as well. As a career women, I was shocked to read the article posted by Michael Noer. Not that the article didn't contain some interesting points and start off a round of lively discussion. However, the way it was written, I would expect to see it in an issue of Maxim magazine, not an esteemed magazine such as Forbes. Why would you risk alienating such a huge proportion of your readership? Every woman I know is a career woman, and you can believe I have emailed this article to all of them.
Traffic increases for your websites? Perhaps in the short term. But since the going agreement among all my friends is that it is a truly insulting piece, we plan on boycotting the magazine and website. Mr. Noer's article was really a slap in the face to all the career women who read Forbes. Perhaps a more balanced discussion of both sexes' involvement in careers and how careers effect marriage would have been a better take. What I take out of the article is that it is ok for men to do all the things that come along with a career, but not for women to do the same.
I was relieved to see that at least you posted a counterpoint to the original. Counterpoint or not, I won't be buying your magazine on my way through the airport or visiting your website anytime soon.
From a truly disappointed reader,
Katrina Van Overbeke
Vice President
Click Industries, Ltd."

Response from Steve Forbes, August 29, 2006:

"I want to acknowledge your communication with us on the article "Don't Marry Career Women."” Sensitive issues demand sensitive treatment. The piece that appeared on Forbes.com this past week was intended to be part academic and part humorous. Instead, it profoundly offended hard-working career women everywhere. We deeply regret having done so.

Steve Forbes

President and Editor-in-Chief
Forbes"
I don't think this quite makes up for orginally posting the article in the first place, but at least they are admitting a faux pas. I leave it up to you to decide.
0