Live data from Hacker News

Resignation Letter

bariweiss.com

1–10 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#3
"Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at [the New York Times]: that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else."

This is a very key point, and what are the consequences of "informing everyone of a truth" that doesn't accurately reflect -- of even contradicts! -- reality? Harm to the reputation of the NYT is the least of the problems that accrue from such a situation, in my opinion.

Re: Resignation Letter

#4
There's several layers of irony here, chief of which Bari Weiss headed a very vocal campaign to fire anyone at Colombia who didn't exist on the far-right on Israel/Palestine - and of course, falsely painted several professors as racist and anti-Semitic:

https://theintercept.com/2018/03/08/the-nyts-bari-weiss-fals...

Re: Resignation Letter

#5
It always amazes me when the people who champion "the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society" will also turn around and say something like their political beliefs being mocking by coworkers is "unlawful discrimination". She doesn't want free speech. She wants consequence free speech. She wants her detractors silenced by the law. What a hypocrite.

Re: Resignation Letter

#6
That this is true at what is supposed to be a reputable publication like The New York Times makes me worried for companies and less known publications. Because if it's happening at the elite end of what is supposed to be curiosity-driven investigation, why wouldn't it be happening elsewhere? And so you end up with a culture where you can't speak about anything, where challenging the orthodoxy means you'll be forced into poverty. Where you don't even know WHAT the orthodoxy is at times because the orthodox eat their own and constantly shift goalposts.

People everywhere need to stand up and issue a firm rebuke to anyone contributing to the toxic environments she described. Either by voting with your wallet, or by being bold and speaking against it in your social circles. It's not too late to turn the ship around.

Re: Resignation Letter

#7
> All this bodes ill, especially for independent-minded young writers and editors paying close attention to what they’ll have to do to advance in their careers. Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril. Rule Two: Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative. Rule Three: Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain. Eventually, the publisher will cave to the mob, the editor will get fired or reassigned, and you’ll be hung out to dry.

It is supremely ironic for a famous writer, employed for years at America's paper of record, to complain about being silenced by her critics in a resignation letter that will be shared far and wide and read by tens — if not hundreds — of thousands of people.

Re: Resignation Letter

#8
post #3

"Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at [the New York Times]: that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else." This is a very key point, and what are the consequences of "informing everyone of a truth" that doesn't accurately reflect -- of even contradicts! -- reality? Harm to the reput…

Whats worse is this phenomenon isn't contained to the NYT all media it appears is infected.

Re: Resignation Letter

#9
post #5

It always amazes me when the people who champion "the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society" will also turn around and say something like their political beliefs being mocking by coworkers is "unlawful discrimination". She doesn't want free speech. She wants consequence free speech. She wants her detractors silenced by the law. What a hypocrite.

Since she hasn't filed discrimination lawsuit, I read it as mocking the victim culture that prevades the others.

Re: Resignation Letter

#10
post #5

It always amazes me when the people who champion "the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society" will also turn around and say something like their political beliefs being mocking by coworkers is "unlawful discrimination". She doesn't want free speech. She wants consequence free speech. She wants her detractors silenced by the law. What a hypocrite.

Since she hasn't filed discrimination lawsuit, I read it as mocking the victim culture that prevades the others.

I don't see how this can be read as mockery:

> There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.

This is what claiming victimhood looks like.

Post reply on HN