But after an internal staff meeting, Sulzberger abandoned any liberal principles he may have had and caved to the woke mob. These are admirable statements to those of a liberal persuasion. We believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate.’ The publisher, AG Sulzberger, said: ‘I believe in the principle of openness to a range of opinions, even those we may disagree with, and this piece was published in that spirit.’
We understand that many readers find Senator Cotton’s argument painful, even dangerous. Bennet tweeted: ‘Times Opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter-arguments, particularly those made by people in a position to set policy. Initially, the powers-that-be at the Times defended the publication of Cotton’s piece, providing a standard liberal rationale.
NYTIMES NEWS MEDIA EDITORIAL FREE
At the same time, the Times’ staff who claim to fear for their own safety due to a senator’s words are the same ones who have declared violent rioting to be mere ‘protests’ and the exercise of free speech. But those who know woke politics would recognise the formulation: words can cause violence. To old-time journalists, the idea that an op-ed could be physically threatening might seem odd. The extraordinary campaign to denounce the opinion piece, written by Republican Senator Tom Cotton, began last Wednesday night, when Times employees began tweeting the same sentence en masse: ‘Running this puts Black staff in danger.’ The News Guild (a union) called it ‘a clear threat to the health and safety of the journalists we represent’. But it was deemed too ‘dangerous’ for the pages of the New York Times by its sensitive staff. This view had majority support among Americans at the time of publication, and was an issue debated in other media. What so offended these employees? An op-ed from a sitting senator that called for the military to back up the National Guard to control rioting in certain cities. Bowing to a threatened ‘virtual walkout’ from its younger and woker staff, the Times’ publisher has sacked its opinion editor, James Bennet. But the leaders of today’s Times have decided to throw some 170 years of liberalism in the dustbin of history.
0 kommentar(er)
