Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Resignation Letter

bariweiss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#81

Post by alecb »

gfodor wrote: post #46
alecb wrote: post #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...

Hilarious that the top comment exemplifies the problem. It seems few today are still able to engage with ideas directly, always trying to filter them through some, any, lens to discredit the ones they don’t like. Sometimes it’s attacking the speaker, sometimes their associations, sometimes the tweets they have “liked.” If all else fails, seek out language in the text itself for unfalsifiable “dog whistles” that allow…

So you're digestion of her letter should not be informed in anyway by the fact that she routinely employed the tactics that she now claims she's a victim of? She's spent her career vilifying and seeking out personal retribution for people who she's disagreed with, I don't know how this doesn't factor into one's purview.

Re: Resignation Letter

#82

Post by toomuchtodo »

minikites wrote: post #55
mikece wrote: post #39

"And so self-censorship has become the norm." This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime: that the free expression and exchange of ideas is thwarted in advance because one doesn't want to deal with drama, fight, or insults that come with saying something not in lock-step with the prevailing group-think. This blunts the curiosity of the intellect and silences all true disciple…

You're assuming "both sides" have an equally valid point of view. Tom Cotton's racist op-ed and COVID denialism are two current examples where one side is definitely wrong. Bari believes there shouldn't be consequences for saying dangerously wrong things.

> Bari believes there shouldn't be consequences for saying dangerously wrong things.

I believe it's important to discuss who gets to decide what "dangerously wrong" is.

Re: Resignation Letter

#83

Post by crazygringo »

> Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: 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.

Is it so bad when anti-racist, pro-fact views are considered orthodoxy?

Every publication has to draw the line somewhere of what the acceptable bounds of discourse are. The NYT isn't going to, and shouldn't, print an Op-Ed defending Nazis. And a lot of conservative positions these days are simply in denial of reality and facts. Do they deserve equal space in the paper? A reasonable, or even "centrist", person will say of course not.

She claims Twitter has become "the ultimate editor" of the NYT. This is such a ridiculous strawman, where do you even start? First of all, there are tons of conservatives on Twitter too. Secondly, the NYT doesn't come even close to the ultra-left-wing voices on Twitter she's presumably referring to. Finally, she says "stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences", but seeing that the NYT is the third-most popular newspaper in the country, that would seem to be objectively untrue or else people wouldn't still be buying it.

If the quality of her analysis in her resignation letter is the same quality of work she was turning out at the NYT, no wonder she wasn't welcomed there.

Re: Resignation Letter

#84

Post by elicash »

mikece wrote: post #39

"And so self-censorship has become the norm." This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime: that the free expression and exchange of ideas is thwarted in advance because one doesn't want to deal with drama, fight, or insults that come with saying something not in lock-step with the prevailing group-think. This blunts the curiosity of the intellect and silences all true disciple…

There's little evidence this is the case.

This post could be summarized in one sentence: Bari Weiss wanted people fired because they called her names and the NYT refused, so she quit and threatened legal action.

Re: Resignation Letter

#85

Post by deschutes »

alecb wrote: post #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...

I'm not familiar with the controversy, so I went looking for actual views of said professors. Wikipedia states 'Massad has characterized Israel as "a racist Jewish state."'

There might be more to this story than Glenn Greenwald frothing at the mouth.

Re: Resignation Letter

#86

Post by duxup »

dimgl wrote: post #54
gfodor wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hilarious that the top comment exemplifies the problem. It seems few today are still able to engage with ideas directly, always trying to filter them through some, any, lens to discredit the ones they don’t like. Sometimes it’s attacking the speaker, sometimes their associations, sometimes the tweets they have “liked.” If all else fails, seek out language in the text itself for unfalsifiable “dog whistles” that allow…

It's truly telling that the most upvoted comment is one working to discredit the writer, rather than taking what's being said at face value.

>rather than taking what's being said at face value

Should we?

I don't always do that, hard to imagine doing so all the time, you'd experience constant whiplash of opinions.

Re: Resignation Letter

#87

Post by banads »

uncoder0 wrote: post #8
mikece wrote: 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.

Not surprising considering the extreme consolidation of mass media corporations over the past 50 years.

Re: Resignation Letter

#88

Post by jakelazaroff »

seibelj wrote: post #30
jakelazaroff wrote: post #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, th…

This is the latest argument from people who claim cancel culture doesn't exist. "How are you being silenced when everyone will read it from your high perch?" High-level writers need to push back against illiberal and anti-free speech proponents to give cover for the lower ranks. If even the top tier writers can't speak their mind, does the lowly intern or new hire stand a chance?

The problem with this rebuttal is that it assumes that the high–level writers and editors are not themselves the illiberal and anti–speech proponents, gatekeeping what perspectives are allowed to be represented in the first place.

For example: Harper's Magazine, which published the recent open letter on cancel culture that Bari Weiss signed, doesn't pay its interns [1], ensuring that only those who can afford to work for free are allowed on the lowest rung of the ladder. If these high–level writers were truly concerned about open debate and a culture of curiosity, they might be more concerned about breaking down barriers such as that. Instead, they're worried that they, the people already at the top of the ladder, might get knocked down to the same level as the rest of us.

[1] https://harpers.org/about/internships/

Re: Resignation Letter

#89

Post by aaronbrethorst »

Redoubts wrote: post #63
dimgl wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's truly telling that the most upvoted comment is one working to discredit the writer, rather than taking what's being said at face value.

> rather than taking what's being said at face value Why should I be this credulous?

It is incumbent upon all of us to be as credulous about Bari Weiss's stated rationale as James Bennett always was about guest op-eds.

Re: Resignation Letter

#90

Post by CJefferson »

majormajor wrote: post #59
CJefferson wrote: post #15

Speaking as someone who absorbs American media externally, there does seem to be a disconnect looking in. About 40% of the America seems to still support Donald Trump, under most polls. It certainly isn't true that 40% of the media supports Donald Trump. As an external viewer, it's easy to imagine no-one was ever going to vote for Donald Trump, no-one ever supported him, and no-one supports him today, but that's clea…

> About 40% of the America seems to still support Donald Trump, under most polls. It certainly isn't true that 40% of the media supports Donald Trump. As an external viewer, it's easy to imagine no-one was ever going to vote for Donald Trump, no-one ever supported him, and no-one supports him today, but that's clearly not reality. You seem to be missing a substantial portion of American media. You just gotta know whe…

It is very possible (in fact, it would make sense), that the anti-Trump media, and the media that tries to reach outside of America to a worldwide audience, would have almost 100% overlap.
Post reply on HN