Sunday, December 31, 2023

This is why you don't hate the media enough

This is why you don't hate the media enough

There’s a part of me that would love a world where everyone agreed with me on everything, but that’s not particularly realistic. I’d even accept that it wouldn’t be particularly desirable, in part because there’s no way I’m right about everything.

But since I can’t get that, I’d happily settle for a world devoid of double standards. I’m not sure that’s realistic either, but it’s probably a bit more achievable.

Only a bit, though.

So, until I can get that world, I’ll be content to call out the double standards, such as we see at the New York Times newsroom.

From Newsmax:

The New York Times is under fire for publishing a Christmas Eve opinion piece written by Gaza City Mayor Yahya Sarraj, who was appointed to his post in 2019 by Hamas, with supporters of Israel saying the decision to post the article promotes "Jew hate."

In his article, "I am Gaza City's Mayor. Our Lives and Culture are in Rubble," Sarraj condemns Israel, saying it has "caused the deaths of more than 20,000 people, according to the Gaza Health Ministry," while destroying or damaging about half the territory's buildings, drawing outcry, reports The New York Post.

Now, here’s the thing. I actually don’t have an issue with them running an op-ed like this.

I may disagree with every word Sarraj wrote, but I don’t actually think it’s a massive issue that the New York Times ran this.

What bothers me, though, is who was silent.

See, a lot of people were pissed about this and voiced their disagreement with the Times’ decision to run the op-ed, but there was a group of people who clearly said nothing at all.

That was the same newsroom that lost its mind when Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed.

Still, the newspaper's critics also pointed out that former editorial page editor James Bennett was forced out of his job after allowing a guest column by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., to be published.

In his article, written in the summer of 2020, Cotton called for a military response to Black Lives Matter protests and rioting that had taken place after the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Bennet published a column in The Economist this month, stating that the newspaper shuts down all debate.

Bennett noted in his The Economist piece that a lot of Americans agreed with Cotton at the time and he was close with President Donald Trump. There were most definitely news reasons to run an op-ed such as that, even if you disagreed with Cotton’s take.

He also wrote, “Some Times reporters and other staff were taking to what was then called Twitter, now called X, to attack the decision to publish his argument, for fear he would persuade Times readers to support his proposal and it would be enacted.” He added, “The next day the Times’s union—its unit of the NewsGuild-cwa—would issue a statement calling the op-ed ‘a clear threat to the health and safety of the journalists we represent’.”

That’s what sticks in my craw about this.

A United States senator with close ties to the White House writes an op-ed about using the military to put down rioters—and rioting was going on nightly in many places right about then—and it’s somehow an affront to all that is good and decent to run it, but when a member of Hamas who also holds political office in Gaza wants to write an op-ed, they’re silent.

Even if you disagree with Cotton on everything, it shouldn’t be difficult to see that he’s still preferable to a member of Hamas, right?

For the New York Times newsroom, though, it’s not.

No, for them an actual and sensical suggestion to end rioting was a bridge too far but terrorists are perfectly acceptable.

What’s more, few in the media seem interested in calling them out on their double standard. In fact, most agree with it so vehemently that they won’t even pretend that it’s a double standard at all.

They’re too indoctrinated to even see it as such.

Republicans, you see, are too horrid to be given a voice, but terrorists are just oppressed people who should be given a platform no matter how many innocent people were raped and murdered by the organization they’re a member of.

I get that you all hate the media. I do too.

None of us are capable of hating it enough.

Hating the media sufficiently would likely result in spontaneous human combustion. Even then, I think the combustion would happen short of the sufficiency point.

https://tomknighton.substack.com/p/this-is-why-you-dont-hate-the-media

No comments:

Post a Comment