4 ms·

> The New York Times is no longer the steady unbias pillar it once was Okay, I'm open to hearing this - I've certainly noticed a decrease in quality (vs quanti

> The New York Times is no longer the steady unbias pillar it once was Okay, I'm open to hearing this - I've certainly noticed a decrease in quality (vs quantity - NYT still leads there) vs, say, the Washington Post. > They hire fresh out SJW types I'm not even sure what this means. I'm used to seeing "SJW" as an attack label that is absent actual meaning, similar to "snowflake" or "libtard", stemming from groups stauchly biased themselves. Are you using it here as an attack based on political belief, or do you have some more nuanced substantive meaning? The rest of your comment doesn't expand on this "epiphany" so I'm left uncertain as to your argument.

ianamartin 7y ago
It certainly can be used as you described, but it doesn't have to be. I sort of loosely define an SJW as someone who 1) believes that the law should be wielded to enforce their version of morality, 2) that the correctness of their morality justifies pretty much any means of attaining it, and 3) that doing anything to further their goal is always preferable to doing nothing to further their goal, even if a specific thing is likely to have adverse consequences. That's a pretty broad definition that almost includes religious people on the right wing of the spectrum, and that's pretty much what I would say is the only difference between a Social Justice Warrior and a Religious Justice Warrior--the source of where they validate their brand of morality. Other than that, they are approximately identical in both their methods and the extent to which they are damaging to liberal democracy. I recognize that this is probably not a very common definition, and your point about SJW being a meaningless insult is likely the correct one.
- noetic_techy 7y ago
  Nope, see my comment above. I added some meaning.
noetic_techy 7y ago
I understand your concern about the SJW label and the charged political context its often used, but it is to me accurate, since this it what they would call themselves. Take a look at this Joe Rogan + Johnathon Haidt podcast clip that talks about SJW cultural origins in northeastern and western elite liberal arts colleges: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9VYf9FKHo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9VYf9FKHo NOTE: Jonathan David Haidt is an American social psychologist and Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University's Stern School of Business (not a crackpot is my point). You see downstream echo's of this hyper virtue signaling subculture now in the NYT since much of thier journalism is fresh outs with little real world experience outside their bubble. I'm a centrist libertarian if you must qualify my argument with my position on the spectrum. In my opinion, I find that classic liberal have a very hard mental block acknowledging that even their own side of the coin can have a toxic extremist end. One that will NOT look and behave like the toxic extremes on the right, but the outcome is the largely negative in the same manor. As Jonathan Haidt in that clip says, they often write it off or are unaware of the problem.
- remarkEon 7y ago
  It's fascinating to watch comments like this get downvoted. Everything you noted is accurate, and is reflected in recent high-profile hires at NYT (Sarah Jeong the most recent). All organizations can go through preference cascades like this, where hiring for certain views becomes self reinforcing to the point where the organization doesn't even realize it has a bias toward them. It can be especially acute when the views are activist in nature, and signaling alignment with them is how to achieve in-group status. Frankly this is kind of a boring observation - it's basic organizational psychology, which Professor Haidt notes on several occasions. Fox News in the run-up to the Iraq War is another great example of this. Every single talking-head they had on aligned with their internal bias toward invasion.
  - PlasticTank 7y ago
    “It's fascinating to watch comments like this get downvoted.” Honestly not anymore, there is an overriding current of well SJWism on this site currently, of course they'll never admit it to themselves. If you ever find yourself downvoting a comment because you disagree with it on an emotional level, you might be the problem.
verteu 7y ago
As the acronym implies, a "social justice warrior" is someone who fights for social justice. Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting.
- pm90 7y ago
  > Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting. Have you considered the possibility that these SJW's are actually representative of today's youth? If they are, shouldn't NYT be hiring even more of them? I really don't care about what the backgrounds of Journalists are, as long as they adhere to the principles of journalism (honesty, a desire to question authority and find the truth at all costs etc.).
  - remarkEon 7y ago
    There’s an inherent conflict in “I am an activist with a specific cause (or causes) I advocate for” and “adher[ing] to the principles of journalism”. It will produce journalism that is not at all neutral (ignoring for a moment if such journalism is possible), but tainted, even unknowingly, but the views of the journalists themselves. It might not even manifest in the story itself, but in the stories they choose to cover.
  - noetic_techy 7y ago
    >> Have you considered the possibility that these SJW’s are actually representative of todays youth? That could not be further from the truth. The phenomena is very localized and manifests from confluence of factors that HAS been studied scientifically: https://youtu.be/2e9VYf9FKHo https://youtu.be/2e9VYf9FKHo It would be like going back in time and saying the youth of the Communist Revolution or the youth of the Iranian Revolution were just “representative of todays youth.” The answer would be: yes, some of them, and look how that turned out for the rest. We can’t conceive of that sort of backward progression in american freedom because we have never experienced it. You have to call out negative toxic ideologies both right AND left. I agree with your second statement, but instead you of journalists you get activist masquerading as journalists.

ianamartin 7y ago

It certainly can be used as you described, but it doesn't have to be. I sort of loosely define an SJW as someone who 1) believes that the law should be wielded to enforce their version of morality, 2) that the correctness of their morality justifies pretty much any means of attaining it, and 3) that doing anything to further their goal is always preferable to doing nothing to further their goal, even if a specific thing is likely to have adverse consequences. That's a pretty broad definition that almost includes religious people on the right wing of the spectrum, and that's pretty much what I would say is the only difference between a Social Justice Warrior and a Religious Justice Warrior--the source of where they validate their brand of morality. Other than that, they are approximately identical in both their methods and the extent to which they are damaging to liberal democracy. I recognize that this is probably not a very common definition, and your point about SJW being a meaningless insult is likely the correct one.

noetic_techy 7y ago
Nope, see my comment above. I added some meaning.

noetic_techy 7y ago

I understand your concern about the SJW label and the charged political context its often used, but it is to me accurate, since this it what they would call themselves. Take a look at this Joe Rogan + Johnathon Haidt podcast clip that talks about SJW cultural origins in northeastern and western elite liberal arts colleges: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9VYf9FKHo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9VYf9FKHo NOTE: Jonathan David Haidt is an American social psychologist and Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University's Stern School of Business (not a crackpot is my point). You see downstream echo's of this hyper virtue signaling subculture now in the NYT since much of thier journalism is fresh outs with little real world experience outside their bubble. I'm a centrist libertarian if you must qualify my argument with my position on the spectrum. In my opinion, I find that classic liberal have a very hard mental block acknowledging that even their own side of the coin can have a toxic extremist end. One that will NOT look and behave like the toxic extremes on the right, but the outcome is the largely negative in the same manor. As Jonathan Haidt in that clip says, they often write it off or are unaware of the problem.

remarkEon 7y ago
It's fascinating to watch comments like this get downvoted. Everything you noted is accurate, and is reflected in recent high-profile hires at NYT (Sarah Jeong the most recent). All organizations can go through preference cascades like this, where hiring for certain views becomes self reinforcing to the point where the organization doesn't even realize it has a bias toward them. It can be especially acute when the views are activist in nature, and signaling alignment with them is how to achieve in-group status. Frankly this is kind of a boring observation - it's basic organizational psychology, which Professor Haidt notes on several occasions. Fox News in the run-up to the Iraq War is another great example of this. Every single talking-head they had on aligned with their internal bias toward invasion.
- PlasticTank 7y ago
  “It's fascinating to watch comments like this get downvoted.” Honestly not anymore, there is an overriding current of well SJWism on this site currently, of course they'll never admit it to themselves. If you ever find yourself downvoting a comment because you disagree with it on an emotional level, you might be the problem.

verteu 7y ago

As the acronym implies, a "social justice warrior" is someone who fights for social justice. Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting.

pm90 7y ago
> Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting. Have you considered the possibility that these SJW's are actually representative of today's youth? If they are, shouldn't NYT be hiring even more of them? I really don't care about what the backgrounds of Journalists are, as long as they adhere to the principles of journalism (honesty, a desire to question authority and find the truth at all costs etc.).
- remarkEon 7y ago
  There’s an inherent conflict in “I am an activist with a specific cause (or causes) I advocate for” and “adher[ing] to the principles of journalism”. It will produce journalism that is not at all neutral (ignoring for a moment if such journalism is possible), but tainted, even unknowingly, but the views of the journalists themselves. It might not even manifest in the story itself, but in the stories they choose to cover.
- noetic_techy 7y ago
  >> Have you considered the possibility that these SJW’s are actually representative of todays youth? That could not be further from the truth. The phenomena is very localized and manifests from confluence of factors that HAS been studied scientifically: https://youtu.be/2e9VYf9FKHo https://youtu.be/2e9VYf9FKHo It would be like going back in time and saying the youth of the Communist Revolution or the youth of the Iranian Revolution were just “representative of todays youth.” The answer would be: yes, some of them, and look how that turned out for the rest. We can’t conceive of that sort of backward progression in american freedom because we have never experienced it. You have to call out negative toxic ideologies both right AND left. I agree with your second statement, but instead you of journalists you get activist masquerading as journalists.