Recently an article made the rounds about a house for sale:
It's about a nice little house for sale. It's very cheap - probably about half the asking price if it were in the nearest city (Hamilton, Ontario - my home town). And! If you can believe this! It's in a nudist resort!
I've seen the article reposted numerous times lately on Facebook, reddit, twitter, and the like, and I noted it because it's located near me and I've visited the Ponderosa Family Nudist Resort many times.
The writer of the piece, Lauren O'Neil, clearly spent a lot of time poring over the Ponderosa's website. She found a fair amount of information about the resort and its amenities and policies. But there is a certain amount of vagueness in the article too: "the listing does not specify", "leading one to assume", and the like.
The areas of question are all quite straightforward. So why not contact the club and ask them? That's what a journalist would do. Is this not supposed to be real journalism?
The article's publisher, BlogTO, is a reasonably reputable website in the Toronto area. Their coverage of local events is widely followed, though their style has given rise to a number of parodies over the years. But they do purport to be a legitimate news website. O'Neil is a senior editor and staff writer. She is an experienced journalist.
So why didn't O'Neil call or email the Ponderosa?
It's the usual, I think: the deep fear in our society of anything associated with nudity. Even the idea of phoning or emailing the club was too much, although it made the article much weaker.
I'm glad that the article got so much attention, because it tells people that nudism is a thing, and for many that there is a club in their area. But it's another disappointing example of the kind of journalism that we nudists have to put up with.
At least there were no stupid jokes or puns about nudity - it could have been worse.