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

151–160 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#151

Post by kyledrake »

ashconnor wrote: post #106
alecb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think readers here think that you are engaging in an "Ad hominem" attack on Weiss but since she herself is the subject of discussion I don't see why you wouldn't include her historical contradictory actions in a response.

It's very appropriate to call someone out on their actions if they are completely inconsistent with what they are claiming to value whenever it stops being useful to them. This isn't a scoring panel for high school speech and debate class.

Re: Resignation Letter

#152

Post by prepend »

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…

I’ve watched this with interest over the years as readership drops to a smaller group that spends more. I believe NYT is still profitable despite lower circulation.

I could guess that this lower circulation is, at least partly, the result of readers who don’t appreciate a false reality being reported as truth. I’m not sure how to measure this. It’s based on my own technique of when I encounter someone speaking false reality I try to understand and come to some common understanding. Sometimes I have it wrong. But if I don’t have a standing relationship with someone who frequently doesn’t operate in reality, I just ignore or unsubscribe. I assume they carry on.

In NYT’s case they carry on and have even more subscribers who like this version of reality. So it’s a bit of a spiral. I’m already surprised how long they’ve lasted.

Re: Resignation Letter

#153

Post by jrumbut »

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…

They have 1,600 journalists last year that were sent to 150 countries [1]. What other organization is doing anything like that effort to gather facts around the world?

Who is doing more collective discovery (and making it accessible to the public at a price an average person can afford)? I can only think of a handful of organizations that are serious candidates (Reuters? The BBC? Wikipedia?).

Weird puff pieces, drama on the editorial pages (what else would there be?), declining standards, you could find the same complaints any year since the first newspaper. I can't take them too seriously until I see an alternative that does the work of collective discovery.

[1] https://www.nytco.com/journalism/journalists-on-the-ground/

Re: Resignation Letter

#154

Post by minikites »

eej71 wrote: post #73
minikites wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I read the Tom Cotton op-ed and didn't find any racist element to it. It would be interesting to have you highlight which paragraph was racist in your eyes.

You don't think the entire op-ed that consists of "send in the military to slaughter tens of thousands of people protesting institutional racism" is racist?

Re: Resignation Letter

#155

Post by [deleted] »

abnercoimbre wrote: post #21
wait_a_minute wrote: post #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 i…

To add to this, the author gives Twitter a lot of weight as the culpable factor. So many important people by now see the birdsite as a genuine net-negative yet it keeps chirping along with no changes. A bit baffling.

[deleted]

Re: Resignation Letter

#156

Post by fullshark »

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…

> This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime:

How it is ironic? It's the explicit intention.

Re: Resignation Letter

#157

Post by jcstauffer »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #77
jakelazaroff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Some of the incidents she described sound a lot like a hostile work environment to me...

Note that "hostile work environment" is a legal term related to a pattern of behavior taken to intimidate someone based on a protected trait (e.g., age, sex, religion, race, disability, etc.).

Notedly, political viewpoints are not a protected trait.

Re: Resignation Letter

#158

Post by throwaway894345 »

seppin wrote: post #124
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…

[flagged]

I don't think there's anything wrong with this. The same criticism could (and probably was) leveraged against the guy who quit Amazon in protest, and much of HN (rightly, IMO) cheered him for leaving a prestigious post because he felt his employer violated his strongly held convictions.

It's fine to take issue with her convictions directly, but spinning the narrative with respect to her leaving her post at all seems disingenuous and ad hominem IMO.

Re: Resignation Letter

#159

Post by krrrh »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #25
ReptileMan wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the Tom Cotton op ed drama was literally this.

Tom Cotton is a sitting US Senator. Denying him op–ed space is in no way tantamount to "silencing" him.

Neither was publishing it an endorsement. Nor was it an endorsement when they published an editorial from an ISIS leader or going back some ways, Hitler. It’s important to know what politicians think.

He could have easily Had it published in the Federalist or Breitbart, but the average nytimes reader would never have had the opportunity to read it. Filter bubbles are a big problem, and getting Cotton on record in the paper of record is a valuable service.

Re: Resignation Letter

#160

Post by zuminator »

dimgl wrote: post #118
fermienrico wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You nailed the problem, this needs to stop.

Funnily enough I'm getting pretty actively downvoted. It's sad... I always thought of Hacker News as a place to have friendly discussion.

You accused the person of contemplating flagging the submission without reading the article. Where do they say they didn't read it first?
Post reply on HN