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

Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 597 posts

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#171

Post by _o0rc »

esja wrote: post #147
_o0rc wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As pointed out below, there are some states where politics are protected. I looked it up because I do plan to use that information in hiring decisions going forward. I wouldn't surprised if I get downvoted for this, but I intend to ask anyone I interview in the future (not currently in a role that involves hiring) if they voted for Trump in 2020. And a yes will be a disqualifying answer on the basis of poor judgement…

Something to ponder given the topic of this thread... your comment says very clearly that you're willing to make decisions which impact a company negatively, provided they benefit you emotionally. That's disqualifying for most positions involving hiring or any other management responsibility, and it's connected to your real identity.

It may not have been clear from my comment, but it’s not an emotional benefit for me. And I don’t agree that it’s necessarily a net negative for the company. There are a lot of factors that impact a company’s overall performance.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#172

Post by _o0rc »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #125
_o0rc wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As pointed out below, there are some states where politics are protected. I looked it up because I do plan to use that information in hiring decisions going forward. I wouldn't surprised if I get downvoted for this, but I intend to ask anyone I interview in the future (not currently in a role that involves hiring) if they voted for Trump in 2020. And a yes will be a disqualifying answer on the basis of poor judgement…

For what it's worth, as an engineering candidate being asked that question would disqualify the asking company from consideration. I do not want to work at a company that is so politically active that the question is allowed. I would also tell my point of contact exactly why I was withdrawing my candidacy and who was responsible.

That’s totally reasonable. And there are companies that have publicly taken positions that align with this.

It wasn’t clear in my comment, but I’m not presenting this from a middle management perspective. I wouldn’t arbitrarily be adding new requirements to some employer’s hiring. This is me speaking about how I’ll act for any company I start next (having been a founder and CEO before).

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#173

Post by MrMember »

>"The Jennifer De Chiara Literary Agency was distressed to discover this morning, January 25th, that one of our agents has been using the social media platforms Gab and Parler. We do not condone this activity, and we apologize to anyone who has been affected or offended by this"

This honestly reads like satire. Why were they "distressed" by this and who could possibly be affected or offended by something so trivial?

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#174

Post by ThankYouBernard »

forgingahead wrote: post #113
tptacek wrote: post #63

Just a reminder that Newsweek ceased publication back in 2013, and the rights to its brand were purchased by an odd Christian sect, somewhat along the lines of The Washington Times and the Reunification Church. The new "Newsweek" capitalizes on the brand reputation of the old one, but has no connections to it; a good thing to do with Newsweek pieces is to check the byline and look up what their background is.

Honest question - it's obvious how you identify politically by all your posts here, but what has your comment got to do with the story? If it's a false story, say it. If it's not - what exactly are you saying with your comment?

Honest question - you're claiming to know what the other person's politics are.

If their politics has any relevance to this story, please say it. Otherwise what are you trying to insinuate here?

(see -- this kind of bad faith "sealioning" is the most low-effort crap that anyone can do)

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#176

Post by _o0rc »

gnicholas wrote: post #161
_o0rc wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As pointed out below, there are some states where politics are protected. I looked it up because I do plan to use that information in hiring decisions going forward. I wouldn't surprised if I get downvoted for this, but I intend to ask anyone I interview in the future (not currently in a role that involves hiring) if they voted for Trump in 2020. And a yes will be a disqualifying answer on the basis of poor judgement…

> It's also a question I will be asking any potential employer I interview with, going forward, for the same reason. This would be a very strange question to be asked of an interviewer. > Yes it means I can't hire employees in California Per the article I linked to up-thread, it's not just CA: California, Colorado, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina, West Virginia, Seattle, Ann Arbor, an…

It would be a strange question, depending on the scenario. You can imagine I probably don’t anticipate being in interviews where I’m asking that of somebody who isn’t the primary executive. (In other words, I wouldn’t want to work under someone whose judgement I don’t trust, and this would be a dealbreaker on judgement.)

You’re correct that it rules out some important locations in tech, and I do think geography will continue to matter to a degree.

I think there’s also some appeal to a company that has strong, publicly stated principles that can benefit recruiting, but it remains to be seen. But when I consider potential future ventures, these are things I’ve considered and intend to apply.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#177

Post by snoshy »

tptacek wrote: post #148
marton78 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim is probably "they're likely false, please exercise caution"

I have no idea if they're false. It's a phoned-in article about a series of tweets. I wrote a comment about "Newsweek", not about the particulars of the post. "Newsweek" is essentially an SEO scam, is the point I'm making, the same way we'd point it out if a scraped blog post was blogspam.

Public service at its finest in the modern world, little thanks for the perseverance it can take to drive it through. Kudos.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#178

Post by sofixa »

dmix wrote: post #164
Proziam wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The better question is what percentage of Parler users fit the stereotype ? Based on what I've seen and people I know who were active on Gab and Parler I would venture to say it's not nearly as high as people think. The amount of people with truly fringe beliefs is pretty small, even when concentrated.

> The amount of people with truly fringe beliefs is pretty small, even when concentrated. And I'd personally much rather have this small group of people outletting their anger onto the internet instead of IRL. Pushing them further and further into a corner with ever expanding censorship and expecting them to become good tolerant citizens has always seemed like a fools game to me.

> And I'd personally much rather have this small group of people outletting their anger onto the internet instead of IRL

IRL they're limited physically to whoever they can reach; online they can make their hate travel the world ( point in case, there were QAnon related actions in Germany! If the Q people had been purely IRL that would have never happened)

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#179

Post by roenxi »

D13Fd wrote: post #15
common_crow wrote: post #10

Reminds me of Dawn Frederick, a literary agent who was "cancelled" for calling 911 on looters who rammed a van into the gas station on her apartment block: https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/p... This happened during the BLM protests this summer in St. Loius. The looters she reported were blocks away from any BLM protest, and other looting bands were setting fires on nearby blocks. Frederick w…

I honestly don't know why people use "post what you're thinking" style social media at all at this point. With employers being so sensitive, how can the cost/benefit analysis ever really result in a determination that it's a good idea to be active on Twitter/Facebook (or Gab, Parler, TheDonald.win, etc.)? Maybe that's part of what makes things get so extreme on those sites. The most reasonable people know enough not…

Technically; people can't post to thedonald.win either. It has been closed down too.

Re: Agent fired from literary agency for using Parler and Gab

#180

Post by jariel »

dguaraglia wrote: post #144
neartheplain wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author and her family received death threats over this. She briefly left the US for her own safety, and was harassed and bullied “to the brink of suicide.” Flippant dismissal of the Internet hate mob is all well and good until it comes for you. The Metro employee faced no disciplinary action. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tasneemnashrulla/dc-met...

I fail to see how the author's plight at the hands of the internet mob makes the situation less nuanced. Flippant dismissal of facts isn't going to help things get better either.

No, this is upside down.

The entire point of the situation is that the nuances are not hugely relevant in the big picture.

Moreover, the nuances are never catered to in cancel culture anyhow.

Nothing remotely significant happened in this situation that should have involved anything other than maybe some stern retorts on the medium she started on i.e. Twitter.

The commenter thinking that 'this was a good outcome' gives us a great example of the vindictive pettiness and overreaction of cancel culture.

You don't lose your job and livelihood for a possibly distasteful public remark, probably taken out of context.

It's actually a pretty great example of the stupidity of cancel culture.

Post reply on HN