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

371–380 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#371

Post by rbecker »

jrumbut wrote: post #360
rbecker wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even ten times that many journalists will do you no good, when what they report is filtered according to some pre-concieved view of the world (or the journalists themselves are only hired if they share that view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nBx-37c3c8 ).

Noam Chomsky says a lot of interesting stuff but he published his writings on 9/11 a couple months after the attacks (and he certainly has his own ideological filters). He's an essayist, a linguist, but not a news source. I'm looking for the better alternative to the NYT here. Where would you go for information if I told you about some surprising event occurred and people on Twitter are posting very different stateme…

You are asking for a cure, but I can only offer a diagnosis.

Re: Resignation Letter

#372

Post by Spooky23 »

Benjammer wrote: post #170
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…

That just sounds like bluster and emotion to me though. Why is truth not a process of collective discovery? Is this implying that truth used to be this and now is not? What exactly does "collective discovery" mean in the context of a newspaper? What evidence is there that this used to be the case and now is not? What is the new "orthodoxy"? Are you able to describe this orthodoxy in specific terms and not just labels…

End of the day, the letter is a provocative piece written by a provocateur. It's hard to be a provocateur in a large enterprise that explicitly self-identifies as the paper of record and an institution.

I don't follow this writer, but based on open letter (and the fact that the individual published an open resignation letter in itself), the individual sounds like someone who didn't function well in a work environment full of big egos. It's hard to swim upstream in that type of org.

Re: Resignation Letter

#373

Post by banads »

csours wrote: post #291
banads wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many examples would it take to convince you? And do you think it's possible for humans to claim they are driven by altruistic, while actually being primarily hateful, deceitful, divisive, and destructive?

> How many examples would it take to convince you? Hundreds, at least. It's been a consistent conservative tactic for decades, to the point where it is unremarkable. Unremarkable does not mean acceptable. See also Trump's lies. Trump lies so often that it's not worth noting each instance. > And do you think it's possible for humans to claim they are being altruistic or inclusive, while actually being primarily hatefu…

As a thought experiment: are there any examples that you can personally think of where self proclaimed liberals used hate and fear to shape public discourse?

Re: Resignation Letter

#374

Post by bpyne »

shuntress wrote: post #280
uncoder0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It is somewhat alarming to see this hostile and dehumanizing language (referring to "all media" as "infected") and makes me automatically skeptical of your point-of-view.

I suspect we have some "deep staters" in attendance. Everything you know, you don't. Everything you believe is false. A liberal conspiracy exists and it's hiding in plain sight.

If you ignore these "throw the baby out with the bathwater" comments, some good discussion is being had.

Re: Resignation Letter

#375

Post by andreilys »

jrumbut wrote: post #334
throwawaysea wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the point you're making, but when such a tenured and large scale organization is subject to increasing ideological bias, couldn't we also cast the entire 'fact collection' activity as being in support of that bias? Who's to know if the facts are being selectively reported, or stitched together to tell one narrative instead of the whole truth? A similar argument applies to academia - biased researchers will sele…

What's the alternative? What is the best source of information available to the public? It's easy to take potshots, show me a news source that's better.

Financial times.

Re: Resignation Letter

#376

Post by koheripbal »

some-guy wrote: post #109
mellosouls wrote: post #28

There seems to be more and more public acknowledgement (and in fora like this one) of the myriad leftist 1984-style attacks we are currently witnessing - every bit as bad as the McCarthy era led by the right. As appalling as the behaviour of these people is, that growing awareness can only be a good thing.

The woke-left isn't going around arresting people, nor do they have much (if any) influence in high levels of government.

Arresting someone is not how intimidation works. If you arrest someone, your intimidate gets the light of the court.

Leftist extremism is exactly avoiding the court system by applying pressure to rob people of their livelihood - a much more immediate, public, and potent method of intimidation - and an excellent way to set an example to others who might speak against the theocracy.

Re: Resignation Letter

#378

Post by jrumbut »

rbecker wrote: post #347
jrumbut wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the alternative? What is the best source of information available to the public? It's easy to take potshots, show me a news source that's better.

The absence of a better news source doesn't mean we should be blind to its faults.

Sure, but the grandparent doesn't say "I read the NYT but here are some flaws..." or "The Houston Chronicle is better because..." it says the entire enterprise has been directed "in support of bias".

I am arguing against being blind to the news source's virtues. If we don't want to be blind to the world we have to pick our poison(s).

Re: Resignation Letter

#379

Post by TeaDrunk »

Bari Weiss was tweeting insults about her co workers in public during a meeting about her behavior. If this came from anyone else they'd be fired in a heartbeat. This is her politicizing a normal action.

Re: Resignation Letter

#380

Post by koheripbal »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #162
mellosouls wrote: post #28

There seems to be more and more public acknowledgement (and in fora like this one) of the myriad leftist 1984-style attacks we are currently witnessing - every bit as bad as the McCarthy era led by the right. As appalling as the behaviour of these people is, that growing awareness can only be a good thing.

Your coworkers and people on Twitter making fun of you isn't comparable to McCarthyism.

How about being fired?

If you remember - the majority of McCarthyism's intimidation was in his "do not employ" lists of people.

Post reply on HN