this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
341 points (95.7% liked)

World News

32327 readers
514 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml 220 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Times Writer Forced Out and Charged With Possession of a Conscience"

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your response is actually much more accurate and grammatically correct than the headline.

I misread it before replying initially.

[–] OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No idea what you wrote initially but thank you. Concise was the goal but accurate and grammatically correct are pretty nice too.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The headline makes it sound like the writer quit because the NYT backed a letter accusing Israel of genocide.

It's a bad headline.

[–] OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It is a little confusing isn't it? I'm sure it wasn't intentional, but for my part I'm glad I read the article before commenting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 148 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Onion has had the best takes on this so far

[–] bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

As is tradition

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 114 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're definitely on the right side of things when you silence people calling out genocides.

[–] dylanmorgan@slrpnk.net 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right. If you think people calling out genocide are wrong, show evidence that contradicts that contradicts that conclusion.

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 year ago

which should be really easy given there will be all the people free and not rounded up on camps with limited expression

[–] ryven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 92 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Silverstein said Hughes also violated the policy earlier in the year, when she signed an open letter protesting the Times’s coverage of transgender issues. “She and I discussed that her desire to stake out this kind of public position and join in public protests isn’t compatible with being a journalist at The Times, and we both came to the conclusion that she should resign,” he wrote in the email.

It seems having a spine isn't compatible with being a journalist at the Times.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, "anywhere where they expect their journalists to present a neutral point of view or the appearance of it" would be more appropriate than saying it's something that only applies to The Times... Journalists know they're risking their career by doing something like what happened here. 8t might lead them to become columnists instead, as happened with a local TV journalist that decided to write a letter criticizing a controversial bill and to submit it for publishing in a journal, she lost her job and started writing books and opinion pieces instead.

[–] gastationsushi@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You believe the right wing op ed writers at the times could ever get fired for their opinions? Bari Weiss was making mid 6 figures posting trash on the NYT before she accused her employer of discrimination to jump start coverage of her new substack.

Everyone is biased, it's how the brain operates. Some biases try to reflect reality while others try to manipulate people to believe propaganda. The Times is perfectly fine employing propagandists.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

Op Ed is the opposite of journalism, I was talking about journalists.

[–] locuester@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 year ago

Op Ed writers literally write opinion pieces. That’s not journalism.

[–] A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.cl 45 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Here in chile the pro Palestine posture is razonably transversal and condemnation to Israel is normal to see.

[–] mibo80@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's interesting how the rest of the world gets a pass. It's almost as if they have to forcibly, manipulate the pro-zionism mindset in the country whose tax payers fund this genocide in its entirety. Hopefully this country can rid itself of that mental disorder and Israel can start taking the responsibility it should have in the beginning when it begged the world for their own safe space where people already lived.

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

I'm not sure what you mean by "the rest of the world gets a pass". What are you trying to express? Thanks!

[–] PrincessZelda@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the Adelaide CBD (Australia) last Sunday there was a 1,000+ people protest in support of innocent Palestinians, and a 5-6 people protest in support of Israel.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Most all protests I see in the US are pro Palestine. Though there are some pro Israel protests.

It’s mainly the media and politicians that are pro Israel, not the protesters.

[–] yumpsuit@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

With reasons well grounded in Chilean history, as I’m sure you may know. I’ve had a very eye opening time with this book, The Palestine Laboratory, free right now from the publisher. The first chapter is a pretty intense recounting of the ways that the Israeli government and military industry were materially supportive to Pinochet’s regime.

[–] Infamousblt@hexbear.net 27 points 1 year ago

The little blurb in the middle of this article about genocide hyping up their "Style!" section as if genocide is just a fun and light pop culture topic is unreal

[–] drphungky@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

It's wild that we live in such polarized times that every single comment in this thread is talking about how this is wrong because of some variant of "she's being fired for calling it like it is."

That's not what happened. She was fired (forced to resign, same difference) because she went on record with a political viewpoint and made value judgements. YOU DONT GET TO DO THAT AS A JOURNALIST. It doesn't matter if she's right (she is, in my opinion, before someone accused me of supporting apartheid and misses the point). What matters is she has taken away any appearance of being unbiased, both for her and by association for the paper. It's crazy damaging and the Times should have fired her instead of letting her resign. This is like journalistic ethics 101. My parents were both journalists and wouldn't even talk to me about who they voted for - and they weren't even in hard news.

I know these days there are so many biased news agencies and lots of opinions masquerading as news, but for hard news agencies this kind of thing does not, and should not fly. The woman was dumb and I hope she was ready for a career writing op-eds and being a partisan talking head, because she'll never write hard news at a reputable source again.

[–] BellaDonna@mujico.org 10 points 1 year ago (7 children)

This is stupid, she's a human first, and journalist second. If aliens were committing genocide on humans would you still have the same opinion?

We should be allowed to have and express opinions. How many reporters use the words terrorist? Freedom fighter? You can't police people's bias, nor should you.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] furysama@mastodon.straylight.engineering 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@drphungky actually, I journalists ARE supposed to disclose their personal biases. It feels much worse to me when media personalities pretend to be objective. They aren't. I think the idea that we should discourage the disclosure if personal opinion is actually really bad for media literacy

[–] drphungky@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Totally hear where you're coming from, and I think in a perfect world, a journalist could recuse themselves of reporting on things where they are hopelessly biased (see Cuomo incident before the later revealed stuff), but I still argue the goal should be to examine and eliminate biases as much possible, and avoid the appearance of minor ones unless they are somehow damning. The introspection necessary to examine your own biases rather than just avoid them helps make you more capable of being more impartial overall, in my opinion.

I think there's real debate on if through such a concerted effort to not give into to one's own biases, you swing too far and start favoring the opposition, but that happens with anyone trying to avoid appearances of impropriety. Not giving your kid the starting pitching slot even if he deserves it because you're the coach, a judge not accepting a free ride to a conference everyone else gets, etc etc.

[–] ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago

What matters is she has taken away any appearance of being unbiased, both for her and by association for the paper.

Nothing is unbiased, anything written by a human is tinted by their perspective, by what they know and by the lack of what they don't know, by their sense of morality, their ideology, etc... At most, you can approach what looks like the neutral position from your perspective, but true neutrality is fundamentally unreachable. Personally, I prefer a journalist that knows what their bias are and state them clearly to their audience over one that pretend like they have the laterally superhuman ability to forme truly unbiased and neutral opinion.

[–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok I get where you're coming from but what if your value judgements are the right ones and everyone who disagrees with you is a bad person?

[–] drphungky@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Then you get a spot writing op-eds so you can dunk on strawmen who don't have the reach or voice to argue with you!

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.de 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Eh... She probably will get a better employer who actually has a conscience.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

That's a hard ask these days.

[–] fosiacat@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

“accusing” I mean..... it’s in the open.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 15 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


The New York Times announced in a note to staff Friday that a writer for its magazine resigned after violating newsroom policy by signing an open letter that accused Israel of trying to “conduct genocide against the Palestinian people.”

Jazmine Hughes, who joined the paper in 2015 and has won multiple national awards, was one of the most prominent names on a statement published last week by a group called Writers Against the War on Gaza.

“While I respect that she has strong convictions, this was a clear violation of The Times’s policy on public protest,” magazine editor Jake Silverstein wrote in an email to staff Friday evening.

Hughes has won a string of accolades while working as a writer and editor at the Times, including a National Magazine Award in March for profiles on Viola Davis and Whoopi Goldberg.

The Israel-Gaza war has forced many institutions to contend with members who feel strongly about the conflict, which involves a long history of Israeli occupation and deadly military reprisals on Palestinian territory.

David Velasco was ousted as editor in chief at Artforum after the arts publication posted an open letter that supported Palestinian liberation and called for a cease-fire.


The original article contains 591 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] lntl@lemmy.sdf.org 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

All the news that's fit to print

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 1 year ago

Good for her. She shouldn’t write for a rag that apologizes for / denies genocide.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

“While I respect that she has strong convictions, this was a clear violation of The Times’s policy on public protest,” magazine editor Jake Silverstein wrote in an email to staff Friday evening. “This policy, which I fully support, is an important part of our commitment to independence.”

Silverstein said Hughes also violated the policy earlier in the year

I get that it's a policy many disagree with but breaking it twice, yeah you'll get fired (or forced to resign I guess)

load more comments
view more: next ›