5 ms·
I love much of the stuff Vice creates and Sarah Jeong is a important voice I follow. But it seems both could not see past the appearance of Naomi Wu, could not
by Kimm0n0 8y ago
I love much of the stuff Vice creates and Sarah Jeong is a important voice I follow. But it seems both could not see past the appearance of Naomi Wu, could not understand her circumstances and putting her at risk to make a minor point in a story.
- growlist 8y agoDo her racist tweets bother you?
- Kimm0n0 8y agoDid she try to mimic what was thrown at her?
- DuskStar 8y agoI've seen a whole lot of tweets from Sarah Jeong throwing shit at white people. I've not seen any yet of white people throwing shit at her based on her race. If there are tweets like that, I'd genuinely love to see them - I'd rather have my knowledge updated than continue being wrong.
- nubol 8y agoBy her tweets I saw two orientations, anti white, female superiority. You can research and find them, in the world of tech, if I see someone with a lot of bias I tend to doubt of his/her quality as a journalist.
- Fellshard 8y agoI'd say that hold regardless of which specific bias of those categories they may hold, because that degree of blatant bias in any area shows they are willing to distort the truth to fit their worldview lens, an unacceptable practice for a journalist.
- nubol 8y agoYes, bias is not good for journalism, but also someone judging people by skin color or gender and not by merits should be excluded from communities that are meritocratic based, otherwise they will destroy us.
- rspeer 8y agoIf you think that Jeong's tweets are equivalent to actual racism, you don't understand what racism is and how it affects people. Racism is not just a matter of politeness. It is not arbitrary rules of decorum that you have to follow. It is not a semantic property of a sentence in isolation. Racism is a systemic problem that threatens people and limits their opportunities. When Sarah Jeong snarks at Andrew Sullivan for being an old white man, old white men are not actually threatened. Yes, this means you can switch races in a comment and it will change from racist to not racist, or not racist to racist, and that's because there's context, it's not just arbitrary rules about words.
- bwilli123 8y ago"This means you can switch races in a comment and it will change from racist to not racist, or not racist to racist" Wow, so convenient. Thanks.
- rspeer 8y agoI sense some sarcasm. Do you want it to be symmetric? Then it would not be the thing we know as racism. Again, this isn't an abstract rule of a game, it does not get its validity from applying the same way to everyone. Racism in our society doesn't apply the same way to everyone, that's the whole point.
- growlist 8y agoHere's the first hit from Google: 'prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.' It seems to me that there's an attempt to shift the definition of racism towards something different from above in order to facilitate the spread of consequence free hate speech.
- vasilipupkin 8y agoThat’s a very weak argument. You are asking us to interpret hundreds of unambiguous tweets in a light that you prefer them interpreted in. But since there is little ambiguity in them, and I don’t know her, I’m taking them at face value.