3 ms·

You need to read the journalist's own account as to how this all blew up. He provides a lot more context and nuance as to who tweeted what and when, but basical

by dwd 6y ago

You need to read the journalist's own account as to how this all blew up. He provides a lot more context and nuance as to who tweeted what and when, but basically screwed up and should have checked his own online history as well. https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tweets.php https://www.cjr.org/first_person/aaron-calvin-viral-story-tw...

aklemm 6y ago
That’s very compelling and sad.
cco 6y ago
This is what that reporter wrote about the tweets. It is 10% of the article that was published by word count and appeared in the middle of the article, not the end as the reporter claims. I'll leave it to people to draw their own conclusions: A routine background check of King's social media revealed two racist jokes, one comparing black mothers to gorillas and another making light of black people killed in the holocaust. The joke tweets date back to 2012, when King was a 16-year-old high school student. Register editor:Here’s how we reported on Carson King’s tweets When asked about the tweets, King was remorseful and thanked the Register for pointing them out, saying they made him "sick." He has since deleted them. "That’s not something that I’m proud of at all," he told the Register during the day Tuesday. Tuesday evening, King spoke to local television stations about the now-deleted tweets. "I am embarrassed and stunned to reflect on what I thought was funny when I was 16-year-old," he said in a statement posted by WHO-TV. "I want to sincerely apologize." He also read the statement in a video posted by KCCI-TV. Anheuser-Busch InBev, Busch Light's parent company, announced in a statement Tuesday night that they will "have no further association with [King]," though they will honor their agreement to match the funds for the children's hospital.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ponker 6y ago
He should have "checked his online history" and realized that maybe he didn't need to write about another person's online history. I don't see him looking any better here -- he casually lobbed a rock at another man and then got all whiny about "editorial integrity" when the rock got thrown at him.
- dwd 6y ago
  Perception is everything. Doesn't really matter if you said or did a particular thing - if people think you did then no amount of explanation will fix that. He can say that he was just mentioning it as an aside of the story, but that's not how it was perceived. He should have dropped it after the guy apologies and deleted them, and I could believe his hands were tied and it was an editorial decision to include it, but having your own credibility in order, no matter how insignificant you may think you are is imperative before you put your name to something that you're hoping blows up. "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect…"
  - ponker 6y ago
    The "just mentioning it as an aside" doesn't really hold even a drop of water given the well-known implications of racism allegations. It's like spending a few hours covering someone's car in silly string (Very annoying, but not sociopathic) and then quickly cutting their brake lines as "an aside."
    - dwd 6y ago
      I agree with you completely, he was outing the guy whichever way he tries to spin his motives. Should have done him the favour of pointing it out and left it at that.
lucideer 6y ago
Excerpts from the journalist's piece I think are worth quoting: > "The specter of “cancel culture” is a concept most often invoked to protect those in power, often straight white men such as myself, from facing consequences for their actions, but I want no part in it. I’m not going to start a YouTube channel railing against the perceived dangers of PC culture. I believe I lost my job unfairly. At the same time, I firmly believe that people, especially those in power, should be held accountable for what they say and do." > "There was no union at the Register. Had I been a union member, I believe I would have been able to more effectively advocate for myself." These two paragraphs are almost a contradiction (saying "I’m not going to start a YouTube channel" but writing a blogpost railing against ununionised workers not being able to advocate for themselves), but it isn't quite a contradiction, and that nuance is exactly where I think the "line" is in this debate. People's lives are ruined not because there's no authoritarian protection of "free" hate-speech, but rather because there's no individual-level protection of actual livelihoods.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Disagree. If we had a more enlightened culture, people wouldn't connect statements from individuals to companies they work for in the first place but that is not relevant. What this shows to me is that he has a clear image of an enemy. An image so hated that he didn't use his conscience while writing the article he got fired for. This is real prejudice and he hasn't worked through that. Otherwise he would not rail against those critical of cancel culture. Protecting people against twitter hysteria is not the work of unions. Additionally, free speech is very valuable and freedom doesn't come without costs. I do think he was fired unfairly, it would be nice if he could extend his judgement about himself to others.

by dwd 6y ago

aklemm 6y ago

That’s very compelling and sad.

cco 6y ago

This is what that reporter wrote about the tweets. It is 10% of the article that was published by word count and appeared in the middle of the article, not the end as the reporter claims. I'll leave it to people to draw their own conclusions: A routine background check of King's social media revealed two racist jokes, one comparing black mothers to gorillas and another making light of black people killed in the holocaust. The joke tweets date back to 2012, when King was a 16-year-old high school student. Register editor:Here’s how we reported on Carson King’s tweets When asked about the tweets, King was remorseful and thanked the Register for pointing them out, saying they made him "sick." He has since deleted them. "That’s not something that I’m proud of at all," he told the Register during the day Tuesday. Tuesday evening, King spoke to local television stations about the now-deleted tweets. "I am embarrassed and stunned to reflect on what I thought was funny when I was 16-year-old," he said in a statement posted by WHO-TV. "I want to sincerely apologize." He also read the statement in a video posted by KCCI-TV. Anheuser-Busch InBev, Busch Light's parent company, announced in a statement Tuesday night that they will "have no further association with [King]," though they will honor their agreement to match the funds for the children's hospital.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ponker 6y ago

He should have "checked his online history" and realized that maybe he didn't need to write about another person's online history. I don't see him looking any better here -- he casually lobbed a rock at another man and then got all whiny about "editorial integrity" when the rock got thrown at him.

dwd 6y ago
Perception is everything. Doesn't really matter if you said or did a particular thing - if people think you did then no amount of explanation will fix that. He can say that he was just mentioning it as an aside of the story, but that's not how it was perceived. He should have dropped it after the guy apologies and deleted them, and I could believe his hands were tied and it was an editorial decision to include it, but having your own credibility in order, no matter how insignificant you may think you are is imperative before you put your name to something that you're hoping blows up. "Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it; so that when Men come to be undeceiv’d, it is too late; the Jest is over, and the Tale has had its Effect…"
- ponker 6y ago
  The "just mentioning it as an aside" doesn't really hold even a drop of water given the well-known implications of racism allegations. It's like spending a few hours covering someone's car in silly string (Very annoying, but not sociopathic) and then quickly cutting their brake lines as "an aside."
  - dwd 6y ago
    I agree with you completely, he was outing the guy whichever way he tries to spin his motives. Should have done him the favour of pointing it out and left it at that.

lucideer 6y ago

Excerpts from the journalist's piece I think are worth quoting: > "The specter of “cancel culture” is a concept most often invoked to protect those in power, often straight white men such as myself, from facing consequences for their actions, but I want no part in it. I’m not going to start a YouTube channel railing against the perceived dangers of PC culture. I believe I lost my job unfairly. At the same time, I firmly believe that people, especially those in power, should be held accountable for what they say and do." > "There was no union at the Register. Had I been a union member, I believe I would have been able to more effectively advocate for myself." These two paragraphs are almost a contradiction (saying "I’m not going to start a YouTube channel" but writing a blogpost railing against ununionised workers not being able to advocate for themselves), but it isn't quite a contradiction, and that nuance is exactly where I think the "line" is in this debate. People's lives are ruined not because there's no authoritarian protection of "free" hate-speech, but rather because there's no individual-level protection of actual livelihoods.

raxxorrax 6y ago
Disagree. If we had a more enlightened culture, people wouldn't connect statements from individuals to companies they work for in the first place but that is not relevant. What this shows to me is that he has a clear image of an enemy. An image so hated that he didn't use his conscience while writing the article he got fired for. This is real prejudice and he hasn't worked through that. Otherwise he would not rail against those critical of cancel culture. Protecting people against twitter hysteria is not the work of unions. Additionally, free speech is very valuable and freedom doesn't come without costs. I do think he was fired unfairly, it would be nice if he could extend his judgement about himself to others.