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

431–440 of 716 posts

Re: Resignation Letter

#431

Post by empath75 »

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…

> 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

So are you suggesting that people not express their opinions? It sounds like you want exactly what she's complaining about.

Re: Resignation Letter

#432

Post by edanm »

dcolkitt wrote: post #394
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…

There's a fantastic Slate Star Codex essay (which unfortunately I can't ironically link to, because that blog was cancelled by the New York Times) about the very point you raise. Basically anytime someone famous and successful comes out against cancel culture, the standard rejoinder is it can't be so bad. Doesn't seem to have stopped your career, so why are you whining? And the point is for every high-profile person…

I love that article and am a huge fan of Slate Star Codex.

But to be clear - it wasn't "canceled" by the NYT, at least not in the way the term canceled is commonly used nowadays. He made the decision to take the blog offline because the NYT decided to dox him, but their purpose wasn't (as far as we know) for that to happen.

Re: Resignation Letter

#433

Post by smsm42 »

slg wrote: post #415
smsm42 wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Calling your climate change denying coworker a backwards dumb-ass is not illegal Illegal is when you call the police. There's lots of behaviors that the employer is better to prevent before you have to call the police. If it rose to the level of illegal, there's a lot of things that already went wrong. > Weiss specifically called out this behavior as unlawful discrimination. If she was uniquely subjected to harassi…

Discrimination is a legal word. She used the phrase "unlawful discrimination" which means she is using it in a legal context. Discrimination is not defined by being "subjected to harassing and hostile behavior" unless the reason for that behavior focuses on a protected class. There is nothing unlawful about treating her poorly based on her "unorthodox thoughts".

> There is nothing unlawful about treating her poorly based on her "unorthodox thoughts".

It could be that she is, not being a lawyer, wrong on the "unlawful" part (it's impossible to know without knowing the details and the NY anti-discrimination statutes and caselaw). So what? It's not an argument in a lawsuit, exact precision of all legal terms is not the most important thing here.

Re: Resignation Letter

#434

Post by commandlinefan »

enraged_camel wrote: post #248
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #27

> Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I…

>> Can't anyone there see past the current insanity and think? "To be inclusive, we have to get rid of her"? Don't they even hear the words coming out of their own mouths? This confuses a lot of people, but the explanation is simple: it is the Paradox of Tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Namely, not tolerating someone, who themselves espouse intolerant views and give voice to intolerant ex…

> Paradox of Tolerance.

The paradox of the paradox of tolerance, though, is that you can exclude any ideology for any reason and insist that you're only excluding the "intolerant" and shut down criticism by invoking the paradox of tolerance.

Re: Resignation Letter

#435

Post by mancerayder »

Barrin92 wrote: post #426
mancerayder wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The OP you're responding to is correct that his popularity is MUCH higher than your response suggests: "In January 2015, the podcast was listened to by more than 11 million people. By October 2015, it had grown to acquire 16 million downloads a month. By April 2019, the podcast had 190 million downloads a month." That's a lot higher a number than your NYT 6 million subscribers (-1 as I just canceled in early June aft…

I did say that he was popular in my post? That's not really the point of the debate. Of course the NYT is a niche market in the sense that only a minority of people actually pay for news. Fox and talk radio probably have 20 times as many viewers/listeners, that's always been the case. But that doesn't say anything about what the NYT has become . They have a larger audience now than they had in the past, and their sta…

>Pewdiepie has a hundred million subscribers or whatever, does he dwarf the New York times in terms of influence in social or political life? No.

Who knows, though? If people influence opinions, by definition don't they influence social or political life?

Re: Resignation Letter

#436

Post by arkaic »

srpablo wrote: post #423

"People were mean to me and other opinion writers who weren't fact-checked and frequently got facts wrong. I'm not considering these complaints Free Speech, but our hurt feelings mean that Free Speech was hurt. My boss, James Bennett, solicited a piece from Tom Cotton that called for the state to take arms against protesters (protesting might called… speech?), and didn't read the piece before publishing it. The peopl…

"Stop boosting her"

Why am I never convinced, and always get annoyed, when I see phrases like this?

Re: Resignation Letter

#437

Post by frank2 »

mrandolph wrote: post #294
leephillips wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give me an exmaple of an intelligent discussion there? I’m genuinely curious. I’ve watched parts of a few of his chats with interesting people, such as Sam Harris, but I didn’t last long, as they veered immediately into vapidity and stayed there. (I agree he’s civil, though.)

I find that the more specialist the guest, the more interesting the conversation, especially when Rogan just shuts his mouth and listens to someone passionate about their field. Lex Fridman, Brian Cox, and Sean Carroll had--in my opinion--super interesting and engaging episodes. That being said, there are currently over 1500 episodes, so there are definitely a good number of fluff episodes in the mix as well. Edit: J…

>when Rogan just shuts his mouth and listens

I disagree and believe some of his interviews with Sean Carroll would've been much improved if he had stopped Carroll every time Carroll had gone on for 4 minutes without saying a single thing he understood and asked Carroll to simplify.

Re: Resignation Letter

#438

Post by leetcrew »

minikites wrote: post #317
seibelj wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think giving a platform to someone who is a sitting US Senator, who has an argument supported by the majority of Americans, in the supposed Newspaper of Record, isn't the craziest thing ever decided and should not have led to the editor's firing.

Why the appeal to authority? There are plenty of senators who don't believe in evolution and other basic principles of science. Publishing an anti-science op-ed from any of them would be just as harmful as Tom Cotton's incitement to violence.

I don't think this is an appeal to authority. if a sitting US senator says something about an event that's already a national news story, isn't that newsworthy?

Re: Resignation Letter

#439

Post by ApolloFortyNine »

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 can see this directly on Reddit, or even here, thanks to the downvote button. It doesn't matter how right you may be, how many sources you may have, if it angers a sufficient people to lead to your post being downvoted, no one will be able to read it.

And though the points are made up, it's always annoying to look at a post you spent half an hour typing and researching just to have it get down to -6 with no further comments.

Re: Resignation Letter

#440

Post by qserasera »

I say we slap a warning label on all opinion pieces "likely to contain misinformation, inaccurate dialogue, or in summary fake news."

I could care less if they're earning less money from it.

Post reply on HN