|
Post by Dr Boom 70 on Aug 4, 2018 11:02:36 GMT
dailycaller.com/2018/08/03/nyt-sarah-jeong-cop-men-tweets/How does The NYT hire someone like this?
"Sarah Jeong, the newest editorial board member of The New York Times, is also responsible for extensive anti-cop and anti-men tweets.
The New York Times stood by Jeong on Thursday after the internet surfaced her old racist tweets, however her full Twitter history reveals her ire was not only directed toward white people. (RELATED: NYTimes’ Newest Hire Sent Tons Of Anti-White Racist Tweets)
The NYT claimed that Jeong was “imitating” the behavior of people who harassed her online, but this does not explain why she was tweeting “fuck the police” and encouraging people to “kill all men.”
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 14:32:50 GMT
Yep, canceled my subscription again yesterday. Nothing to do with this hire, really, just an overall dislike for their product.
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Aug 4, 2018 14:49:22 GMT
I have my complaints about the Times—I post about them on occasion here and on the mothership—but it really is a pretty great product for a reasonable price. It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership—and doesn’t always play things down the middle—but typically well written, comprehensive, and full of interesting info.
This controversy is dumb. I really can’t imagine anyone is seriously offended by it. Just people who want an excuse to bash the Times.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 14:51:40 GMT
I have my complaints about the Times—I post about them on occasion here and on the mothership—but it really is a pretty great product for a reasonable price. It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership—and doesn’t always play things down the middle—but typically well written, comprehensive, and full of interesting info. This controversy is dumb. I really can’t imagine anyone is seriously offended by it. Just people who want an excuse to bash the Times. You don’t have a problem with the hire?
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Aug 4, 2018 15:01:30 GMT
I have my complaints about the Times—I post about them on occasion here and on the mothership—but it really is a pretty great product for a reasonable price. It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership—and doesn’t always play things down the middle—but typically well written, comprehensive, and full of interesting info. This controversy is dumb. I really can’t imagine anyone is seriously offended by it. Just people who want an excuse to bash the Times. You don’t have a problem with the hire? No—just like I didn’t have a problem with The Atlantic hiring Kevin Williamson.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 15:06:40 GMT
Well, I’m not calling for her firing, but I think it’s another nail in the coffin for media credibility. As a journalist, I wish legacy media like the NYT would quit giving the “enemy” crowd so much to work with.
I get the sense that the media in general thinks they are above apologies and accountability. Very much in the vein of their white whale.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 15:34:11 GMT
I changed my mind. She should be fired because she never should have been hired.
Either the NYT — a publication (often rightly) held up as the pinnacle of journalism— didn’t do its due diligence in its background check of Sarah Jeong OR it did and doesn’t care. Neither is defensible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 15:37:45 GMT
The Williamson comparison only works in the context of the reactionary mob. It doesn’t work on the merits of the hire.
|
|
|
Post by btexpress on Aug 4, 2018 16:15:10 GMT
It's not like there is this one job that has to be done and only Ms. Jeong can do it. And it's not like the NYT doesn't have a warehouse full of candidates from which to choose for these jobs, 95 percent of whom aren't going to be a lightning rod waiting to be hit.
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Aug 4, 2018 16:19:59 GMT
It's not like there is this one job that has to be done and only Ms. Jeong can do it. And it's not like the NYT doesn't have a warehouse full of candidates from which to choose for these jobs, 95 percent of whom aren't going to be a lightning rod waiting to be hit. I’m not outraged by the hire, as I said, but this is certainly a fair point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 16:22:26 GMT
It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership
My gosh, your definition of "a bit" is wildly different from mine. Á chacun son gout, I suppose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 18:59:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elderly man, very poor memory on Aug 4, 2018 19:27:14 GMT
I have my complaints about the Times—I post about them on occasion here and on the mothership—but it really is a pretty great product for a reasonable price. It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership—and doesn’t always play things down the middle—but typically well written, comprehensive, and full of interesting info. This controversy is dumb. I really can’t imagine anyone is seriously offended by it. Just people who want an excuse to bash the Times. Attended Berkeley and Harvard, hired by the Times by the time she was 30. I can see she has a lot of oppression to be mad about.
|
|
|
Post by lcjjdnh on Aug 4, 2018 19:48:50 GMT
I have my complaints about the Times—I post about them on occasion here and on the mothership—but it really is a pretty great product for a reasonable price. It panders a bit to its (liberal) readership—and doesn’t always play things down the middle—but typically well written, comprehensive, and full of interesting info. This controversy is dumb. I really can’t imagine anyone is seriously offended by it. Just people who want an excuse to bash the Times. Attended Berkeley and Harvard, hired by the Times by the time she was 30. I can see she has a lot of oppression to be mad about. [
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2018 20:29:12 GMT
The “language of my harassers excuse” is bullshit. As shown in the link I provided above.
|
|