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

On Being Blacklisted

aaronkunin.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 201 posts

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#41

Post by ttt0 »

walrus01 wrote: post #32

Nobody owes you a free publishing platform. He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision, and positive response from them, something to the effect of "oh, how dare we deny your article, woe unto us, we were so dreadfully wrong"... Really? The biggest takeaway that I got from his December essay, and this one? A sense of self rig…

I guess, but that's a weird point to make in the context of (self-)censorship in the academic world. Just saying.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#42

Post by eli »

rsj_hn wrote: post #14

"“we believe the essay does not align with Chicago Review’s editorial and political agenda.”" It's interesting that some academic literary magazines are now being forced to admit they have political agendas, which is a step in the right direction. People like Kunin are the conscience of our generation, daring to stand up to the mobs and tell the truth - a political act that conflicts with the Chicago Review's agenda.…

How could one possibly publish poetry in a non political way?

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#43

Post by ttt0 »

sneak wrote: post #37
ttt0 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's closer to "you know, I wish this hadn't been released and I've decided that no one should be able to sell their copies of it ." According to wsj: > Online marketplace eBay Inc. said it is working to prevent the resale of six Dr. Seuss books that were pulled earlier this week by the company in charge of the late author’s works because they contain offensive imagery.

eBay decided themselves they didn't want to be associated with it; the author's estate didn't dictate to them that nobody is allowed to trade in it. They're still on Amazon, of course, as are a bunch of racist bumper stickers and a billion other SKUs.

Of course, you're right, I should've phrased that differently.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#44

Post by fatbird »

hirundo wrote: post #12

Is there anyone that wants to defend this blacklisting of the author by the Chicago Review for writing this article [0]? That is, not to reconfirm that they do indeed have the right to do so, but to argue that they are right to do so? Maybe some of us can avoid this fate if we understand the grounds for it, since they decline to make it explicit. What did he say that was not just wrong, but so wrong that he should no…

By including Kunin, they lost enough other contributors that their project was threatened. As a voluntary effort by grad students, they don't have the time or money to make a spirited defense of Kunin. He's had to take up his martyrdom on his own.

I'm sure Kunin would have been very happy for them to burn their project down for his sake. Kunin's sake is not the only one at play here.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#46

Post by [deleted] »

jariel wrote: post #26
poopoopeepee wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You die on the hill you fight on > Blacklisting is an evil in itself, corrosive to the ideal of an open society, and to professional relationships in the small world of literary publishing in which this story takes place Author wants to take one for their team. Everyone will let them. If it's about the ideas, then you can always get those out there. If it has to be attached to your name, well, you're in the realm of…

Just the opposite, if what you were saying were even remotely true, we wouldn't attach names to anything, including scientific papers. To suggest that people should hide behind pen-names to discuss the most important ideas of any given era is to accept and promote the vicious kind of black listing that is apparently happening all to frequently. Names also provided a basis for reputation, we don't just publish any old…

[deleted]

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#47

Post by yew »

schoen wrote: post #40
yew wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? I've just read the article. It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race; it barely merits being called an opinion. (It is an example of why the academic personnel pool needs the thorough cleaning it's currently getting.) Anyone who declined to associate with the author would be right to do so. There aren't many people who don't understand what this kind of article is really about. The Chicago Rev…

I would most likely have downvoted your reply if I'd encountered it in any other context, but I upvoted it because you were replying to an invitation to defend the magazine's decision that purported to be curious about why someone would defend it. I really don't like the pattern of asking "I'm curious whether anyone would seriously advocate opinion X that's controversial in this community, and why" and then downvotin…

It certainly makes following the conversation more difficult, but you needn't feel obligated. I don't mind watching the total go up and down with the tide...

Edit: but as my answer (including quote!) below has been flagged, I think I'll just leave this to stand on its own.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#48

Post by josephg »

walrus01 wrote: post #32

Nobody owes you a free publishing platform. He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision, and positive response from them, something to the effect of "oh, how dare we deny your article, woe unto us, we were so dreadfully wrong"... Really? The biggest takeaway that I got from his December essay, and this one? A sense of self rig…

> He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision

Thats not my read of the situation. I agree that if his goal was to convince the authors, it would make sense for him to be more accomodating. And it wouldn't make sense to call them out in public.

But thats not his goal here. To my eyes, this piece takes a shot at the culture which produced their editorial decision. He's calling cancel culture (and its adherents) craven and scared, using this situation as an example.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#49

Post by throwaw4ybio »

walrus01 wrote: post #32

Nobody owes you a free publishing platform. He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision, and positive response from them, something to the effect of "oh, how dare we deny your article, woe unto us, we were so dreadfully wrong"... Really? The biggest takeaway that I got from his December essay, and this one? A sense of self rig…

If his goal is to change the publisher's mind, calling them "craven" is a terrible rhetorical tactic.

Re: On Being Blacklisted

#50

Post by afutd »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #3
naringas wrote: post #2

There's also an ongoing 'cultural revolution' in which older artistic creations are being reassesed by modern political correctness. (see the recent ebay and Dr. Seuss news for a most recent example) I find this "revisionism" frightening. I fear it'll continue to get worse. I hope it does not.

There's even a movement to replace the term "Blacklist" with a less problematic words such as denylist or blocklist. Of course, "Whitelist" is just as problematic - if not moreso! - and should be replaced with allowlist or safelist. Edit: The etymology of these words have nothing to do with skincolor, Blackness or Whiteness.

Although I agree with the thrust of your edit, I’d actually be okay with making the swap if a black person from an underprivileged background told me that terms made him uncomfortable. But somehow it’s always a white woman from a privileged background that’s insisting we say allowlist or Latinx.
Post reply on HN