5 ms·

It's worth noting that JCD had posted some tweets the day before that were critical of postmeritocracy.org and some comment by Al Gore about Trump. Looks like

It's worth noting that JCD had posted some tweets the day before that were critical of postmeritocracy.org and some comment by Al Gore about Trump. Looks like a de-platforming may have happened.

lukev 8y ago
Yeah, not really how that works.
- busterarm 8y ago
  Please explain. Having a strong political opinion as an editor and firing your most popular author who has the contrary opinion sounds exactly like what that is. That's just how it appears anyway.
  - Operyl 8y ago
    The email states they’re winding down more than just him. Not everything is a conspiracy, PC Mag could just be cost cutting or downsizing due to a reduced readership.
    - busterarm 8y ago
      The timing looks really bad. I'm reserving judgement to see confirmation from their other columnists (whom I listed in a separate reply). His tweet also claims it to be a false pretense -- why take one person's word over the other?
      - samastur 8y ago
        Because his whole tweet stream is like that. There will be no perfect timing where you will not be able to find something political adjacent to "explain" firing. Still, firing over email is still sucky.
    - itbeho 8y ago
      I think you are right and it's probably the most plausible answer. But in the spirit of interpreting the parent comment with good faith, help me walk through a thought experiment: Try getting a job or a promotion with any VC backed SV company while having a Twitter bio that indicates you voted for or support Trump. Not quite willing to do that? A bridge too far? No prob. Instead, just put that you support the 2nd Amendment. Or the military. Or law enforcement. Or smaller government. I dare you...
      - daveFNbuck 8y ago
        I've never seen a problem with coworkers who loudly support any of these causes at VC backed SV companies. One of my coworkers posted about how happy he was about King Trump winning the election. He was promoted and later hired at another VC-backed SV company.
        itbeho 8y ago
        Great! Please share a link to the post. I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - lukev 8y ago
    De-platforming is an explicit choice to disassociate from a particular, repugnant point of view. It's a highly visible, inherently political (and therefore public) move. Firing your star columnist by email citing budget concerns doesn't fit the MO. De-platforming is also not usually deployed in service of mere political disagreement (staunch conservatives speak at institutions that perform no-platforms all the time). It's reserved for positions that are perceived to be outside the bounds of what should be accepted by society such as white supremacy, blatant homophobia, etc. As far as I'm aware, Dvorak didn't publicly hold any such positions. So even if (and that's a HUGE what-if given the facts) he were let go for ideological concerns, it wouldn't count as a no-platforming move.
    - busterarm 8y ago
      I think if you were to casually browse JCD's twitter feed over the past few weeks, you might see a lot of posts and retweets that many people might find objectionable.
      - lukev 8y ago
        Look, you can believe whatever you want about why he was fired, but "no-platforming" is an actual deliberate thing and this was by definition not it. I read over his tweets for the past couple weeks and while he comes off as your typical conservative blowhard, there's nothing worthy of public outcry and therefore worthy of a de-platforming event. Look. I almost feel bad about myself for engaging with you on this level. But this is important. Progressives actually don't oppose the right of people to believe differently. The idea behind no-platforming is that it's not acceptable to amplify someone spewing hate. You may not agree with that, but if you can't understand that that's the motivation, then you're tilting at windmills here.
        busterarm 8y ago
        Woah, hold up there. You're speaking for some progressives as if you're speaking for all. I generally like to think of myself as progressive. I'm pretty sure that many progressives consider employing someone in your organization who posts hateful content online _is_ amplifying them. Look at the internal messages of Google employees in the John Damore lawsuit documents if you don't believe me. Breitbart fired Milo over the same shit.
rdtsc 8y ago
I was gonna say that's ridiculous, but took a second look and maybe not > @MrNoysSky Replying to @THErealDVORAK @dancosta "Probably cuz you're a Trump supporter. Good for them" Right, he did re-tweet Greenwald apparently and something about Keith Ellison's victim's abuse medical records. Well fire him on the spot and maybe even burn him at the stake, I guess. /s
- busterarm 8y ago
  Right. I looked at his tweets before I spoke. He may not be a Trump supporter but he clearly is unhappy with the effort made to remove him.
GW150914 8y ago
Quoting blihp: Note that the screenshot of the email notifying him indicated they were going to 'put all outside columns on hiatus.' That sounds like pure cost cutting to me. It sounds like the magazine is dead or dying.

It's worth noting that JCD had posted some tweets the day before that were critical of postmeritocracy.org and some comment by Al Gore about Trump. Looks like a de-platforming may have happened.

lukev 8y ago

Yeah, not really how that works.

busterarm 8y ago
Please explain. Having a strong political opinion as an editor and firing your most popular author who has the contrary opinion sounds exactly like what that is. That's just how it appears anyway.
- Operyl 8y ago
  The email states they’re winding down more than just him. Not everything is a conspiracy, PC Mag could just be cost cutting or downsizing due to a reduced readership.
  - busterarm 8y ago
    The timing looks really bad. I'm reserving judgement to see confirmation from their other columnists (whom I listed in a separate reply). His tweet also claims it to be a false pretense -- why take one person's word over the other?
    - samastur 8y ago
      Because his whole tweet stream is like that. There will be no perfect timing where you will not be able to find something political adjacent to "explain" firing. Still, firing over email is still sucky.
  - itbeho 8y ago
    I think you are right and it's probably the most plausible answer. But in the spirit of interpreting the parent comment with good faith, help me walk through a thought experiment: Try getting a job or a promotion with any VC backed SV company while having a Twitter bio that indicates you voted for or support Trump. Not quite willing to do that? A bridge too far? No prob. Instead, just put that you support the 2nd Amendment. Or the military. Or law enforcement. Or smaller government. I dare you...
    - daveFNbuck 8y ago
      I've never seen a problem with coworkers who loudly support any of these causes at VC backed SV companies. One of my coworkers posted about how happy he was about King Trump winning the election. He was promoted and later hired at another VC-backed SV company.
      - itbeho 8y ago
        Great! Please share a link to the post. I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- lukev 8y ago
  De-platforming is an explicit choice to disassociate from a particular, repugnant point of view. It's a highly visible, inherently political (and therefore public) move. Firing your star columnist by email citing budget concerns doesn't fit the MO. De-platforming is also not usually deployed in service of mere political disagreement (staunch conservatives speak at institutions that perform no-platforms all the time). It's reserved for positions that are perceived to be outside the bounds of what should be accepted by society such as white supremacy, blatant homophobia, etc. As far as I'm aware, Dvorak didn't publicly hold any such positions. So even if (and that's a HUGE what-if given the facts) he were let go for ideological concerns, it wouldn't count as a no-platforming move.
  - busterarm 8y ago
    I think if you were to casually browse JCD's twitter feed over the past few weeks, you might see a lot of posts and retweets that many people might find objectionable.
    - lukev 8y ago
      Look, you can believe whatever you want about why he was fired, but "no-platforming" is an actual deliberate thing and this was by definition not it. I read over his tweets for the past couple weeks and while he comes off as your typical conservative blowhard, there's nothing worthy of public outcry and therefore worthy of a de-platforming event. Look. I almost feel bad about myself for engaging with you on this level. But this is important. Progressives actually don't oppose the right of people to believe differently. The idea behind no-platforming is that it's not acceptable to amplify someone spewing hate. You may not agree with that, but if you can't understand that that's the motivation, then you're tilting at windmills here.
      - busterarm 8y ago
        Woah, hold up there. You're speaking for some progressives as if you're speaking for all. I generally like to think of myself as progressive. I'm pretty sure that many progressives consider employing someone in your organization who posts hateful content online _is_ amplifying them. Look at the internal messages of Google employees in the John Damore lawsuit documents if you don't believe me. Breitbart fired Milo over the same shit.

rdtsc 8y ago

I was gonna say that's ridiculous, but took a second look and maybe not > @MrNoysSky Replying to @THErealDVORAK @dancosta "Probably cuz you're a Trump supporter. Good for them" Right, he did re-tweet Greenwald apparently and something about Keith Ellison's victim's abuse medical records. Well fire him on the spot and maybe even burn him at the stake, I guess. /s

busterarm 8y ago
Right. I looked at his tweets before I spoke. He may not be a Trump supporter but he clearly is unhappy with the effort made to remove him.

GW150914 8y ago

Quoting blihp: Note that the screenshot of the email notifying him indicated they were going to 'put all outside columns on hiatus.' That sounds like pure cost cutting to me. It sounds like the magazine is dead or dying.