Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Whoever the nuts are who’ve been demanding Bennett’s firing and complaining to management about being triggered by insufficiently woke co-workers.
My guess is Charles Blow, who seems sincere but clearly has some mental health issues and several axes to grind, probably controls a faction of strident lefties. He’s activist, and I can’t see him abiding someone like Weiss.
But I could be wrong. Perhaps he is an ardent supporter of true free speech.
|
Is there any source but Weiss' twitter ramblings telling you this actually happened?
My understanding (in part from the Times' statement itself and in part from what others have said) is that the man was fired but after he admitted he hadn't read the op-ed before running it, that he went to Cotton looking for something provocative and actually pushed Cotton to make his original idea more provocative, and that he hadn't had the op-ed fact-checked or run through the normal process. After the fact, Times management indicates the article would have failed a fact-check and didn't meet their standards. Is he just doing a really good job of falling on his sword for the Times? Because his story and Weiss' seem very different.
It does seem a lot of people, within and outside of the Times, had a wide range of complaints about Cotton's article, but those complaints are generally what is called "speech". I have heard one person (a letter signatory) indicate that they believe there was a breach of journalistic ethics because some complaints came from the news side and the wall between news and editorial is sacrosanct, and that seems like a real concern (if true). But if its just that there were some folks in the Times' editorial office who called that shitty article a piece of shit, it may have hurt someone's feelings but that's life in the big city buckaroo.
Sheesh. I have to stop commenting on this train wreck. Why can't I just drive past the train wrecks? Also, Charles Blow is great.
