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

The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 247 posts

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#11

Post by Mountain_Skies »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #3

I keep hoping that we reach and pass Peak Woke, but I think we're still not there. Journalism (capital J) has been thoroughly damaged by it, as is evident in so many magazines, newspapers, sites, channels, etc. I'm optimistic that there will be a renaissance of objective Journalism, and eager for it to happen.

There has to be a downside to wokeness for it to peak and decline. For some employers, this is starting to happen as the downsides become apparent but for most who kneel at the altar of wokeness, it's almost all upside for them. Society as a whole turning against it or widespread violent blowback are probably the only things that could change this anytime soon. Doubt either happens, though sporadic violence already seems to be taking place.

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#12

Post by colordrops »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #9
type0 wrote: post #6

Some of their pieces on the blog site read completely like satire (unfortunately they are not), it baffles me how a sane person can write something like that https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/fat-is-not... tldr it's because the oppression

"Focusing on weight—or health behaviors—puts the burden on the individual, deflecting attention from the more pernicious problem: systemic injustice." Sounds like when I was a kid and said "the devil made me do it". Taking responsibility for our (in)actions is a necessary prerequisite for being an adult.

Realistically it's a joint responsibility between the system and the individual. Culture and historical context have a huge role in how people behave, which is why one country can consist of mostly skinny healthy people and another unhealthy overweight people. It's not because the latter country's people are genetically predisposed to be irresponsible adults.

You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's both. Why must everything be a binary war nowadays?

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#14

Post by yeetaccount4 »

type0 wrote: post #6

Some of their pieces on the blog site read completely like satire (unfortunately they are not), it baffles me how a sane person can write something like that https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/fat-is-not... tldr it's because the oppression

I was listening to NPR the other day and they had a piece about how the individual can do their part reducing carbon emissions by not eating so much meat. The interviewee went into the amount of resources that go into supporting a diet with meat vs a less-meaty diet and the point was pretty clear. The interviewer rounded off the piece by asking about racial disparities and how this will disproportionately affect non whites.

In some circles, this sort of thing is called eco-fascism I guess.

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#15

Post by type0 »

christkv wrote: post #8
type0 wrote: post #6

Some of their pieces on the blog site read completely like satire (unfortunately they are not), it baffles me how a sane person can write something like that https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/fat-is-not... tldr it's because the oppression

I cracked up when I saw the name of the author to the link you posted. Some sort of comic joke or destiny.

I was more shocked to find out that the author somehow got a PhD in Physiology

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#16

Post by serf »

colordrops wrote: post #12
readthenotes1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Focusing on weight—or health behaviors—puts the burden on the individual, deflecting attention from the more pernicious problem: systemic injustice." Sounds like when I was a kid and said "the devil made me do it". Taking responsibility for our (in)actions is a necessary prerequisite for being an adult.

Realistically it's a joint responsibility between the system and the individual. Culture and historical context have a huge role in how people behave, which is why one country can consist of mostly skinny healthy people and another unhealthy overweight people. It's not because the latter country's people are genetically predisposed to be irresponsible adults. You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's b…

>You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's both. Why must everything be a binary war nowadays?

in societies with limited 'systems', obesity is a non-issue; so if that's the case then it stands to reason that it's the responsibility of the individual to try to disregard the temptations that the 'system' they're a member of places in front of them, no?

This is further reinforced by the fact that heavily-obese countries are not anywhere near 100% obese; individuals in those societies acted with their own sovereignty to avoid whatever physiological issues.

So, in other words, I blame both the individual and the system for the journey towards obesity, but feel that it remains staunchly in the individual hands of the person to avoid whatever pitfalls their individual systems put in front of them.

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#17

Post by pessimizer »

kerneloftruth wrote: post #3

I keep hoping that we reach and pass Peak Woke, but I think we're still not there. Journalism (capital J) has been thoroughly damaged by it, as is evident in so many magazines, newspapers, sites, channels, etc. I'm optimistic that there will be a renaissance of objective Journalism, and eager for it to happen.

"Journalism (capital J)" was always trash. "Objective" journalism is just a euphemism for institutional journalism, which has always served the interests of the powerful. Now that the institutions of power have shifted from projecting white/male-supremacist nationalist Christian conservatism to pure predatory neoliberalism, a lot of people who thought that the newspapers were noble carriers of the light of truth are shook.

There's nothing that the networked financial scams that we refer to as first world economies love more than making the real issue irrational predjudice rather than anything material.

We'll pass peak woke after the white male backlash results in serious consequences for already oppressed people. Then we'll get back to white male identity politics, and the papers won't be any more objective than they were before.

My favorite story about all this was that in 2016 MSNBC was so sure of Clinton's pending win that the new head was going to completely revamp the network editorial line in order to attack Clinton from the right. Instead, with the curse/blessing after the election of the Trump media gravy train continuing, they doubled down into what we see today. How do you attack Trump when you generally agree with him on policy? Wokeness and Russians, while periodically slipping in actual political objections, which consisted of objections to withdrawal from lucrative wars, not arming the Ukrainians, and tariffs.

Wokeness is a PR strategy. A summer of marching in the streets, and the police are more funded than ever.

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#18

Post by kiba »

serf wrote: post #16
colordrops wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically it's a joint responsibility between the system and the individual. Culture and historical context have a huge role in how people behave, which is why one country can consist of mostly skinny healthy people and another unhealthy overweight people. It's not because the latter country's people are genetically predisposed to be irresponsible adults. You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's b…

>You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's both. Why must everything be a binary war nowadays? in societies with limited 'systems', obesity is a non-issue; so if that's the case then it stands to reason that it's the responsibility of the individual to try to disregard the temptations that the 'system' they're a member of places in front of them, no? This is further reinforced by the fact that heavily-…

I mostly viewed obesity as an insidious health problem that cannot easily be resolved, and yet individual agency can somehow overcome the problem, as I nearly did two months ago.

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#19

Post by Georgelemental »

Mountain_Skies wrote: post #11
kerneloftruth wrote: post #3

I keep hoping that we reach and pass Peak Woke, but I think we're still not there. Journalism (capital J) has been thoroughly damaged by it, as is evident in so many magazines, newspapers, sites, channels, etc. I'm optimistic that there will be a renaissance of objective Journalism, and eager for it to happen.

There has to be a downside to wokeness for it to peak and decline. For some employers, this is starting to happen as the downsides become apparent but for most who kneel at the altar of wokeness, it's almost all upside for them. Society as a whole turning against it or widespread violent blowback are probably the only things that could change this anytime soon. Doubt either happens, though sporadic violence already s…

For many employers wokeness is a legal requirement. If they don't make all the right noises suddenly they get sued for "hostile workplace environment" and have to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars. This happened to Tesla a few months ago: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/05/tesla-must-pay-137-million-t...

Re: The Shameful Decline of Scientific American

#20

Post by andrewclunn »

colordrops wrote: post #12
readthenotes1 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Focusing on weight—or health behaviors—puts the burden on the individual, deflecting attention from the more pernicious problem: systemic injustice." Sounds like when I was a kid and said "the devil made me do it". Taking responsibility for our (in)actions is a necessary prerequisite for being an adult.

Realistically it's a joint responsibility between the system and the individual. Culture and historical context have a huge role in how people behave, which is why one country can consist of mostly skinny healthy people and another unhealthy overweight people. It's not because the latter country's people are genetically predisposed to be irresponsible adults. You can't fully blame the system or the individual. It's b…

So how is advocating for a system that removes all social pressures towards healthy lifestyles a fix or even improvement? You assume people are incapable of nuanced discussion, yet you appeal to a vague "it's complicated" approach that merely avoids the issues.
Post reply on HN