3 ms·

From what I'm gathering, the quote she attributes to Kirk appears to not be a statement he made. I'm not able to find a source for that quote anywhere, but I'm

From what I'm gathering, the quote she attributes to Kirk appears to not be a statement he made. I'm not able to find a source for that quote anywhere, but I'm also not about to go watch/listen to everything Kirk ever said in case it was never transcribed anywhere. If it is true that Kirk never said that, I would say that definitely compromises the trust in her as a journalist. And I'm saying this as someone who is on the "political left" by US standards, though more centrist by broader western standards.

muddi900 1y ago
There is nothing uncharacteristic about statement. This is something similar he said about black people. https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ZPr6KwnzA/ https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ZPr6KwnzA/ The benefit of the doubt should go to the author. Why are we pretending that he was not this?
- IAmBroom 1y ago
  Why should any side get the benefit of the doubt?
  - lucyjojo 1y ago
    logical consistency?
  - muddi900 1y ago
    In any given conflict, there would be doubt. And one side will have the advantage due to it. Like in sports tv umpiring. Whenever the image is not clear as to what the decision should be, the rules have a carve out on which side whould get the benefit of benefit of that doubt. Otherwise the game will be stuck. In life, where certainty is much more rare, it is a good rule of thumb to handle doubts this way. By OP's own admission, they can't watch every hour and minute of Charlie Kirk's speeches, interviews, and TV appearances. But he has a clear pattern of making remarks such as this. Why would you believe that he did not make that statement? Objectivity does not require anyone be neutral for no reason. It is reasonable to assume that the author is correct.
    - orionsbelt 1y ago
      It’s a misquote - in quotation marks! - for which the full video is available and shows it is a misquote.
      - muddi900 1y ago
        But has the meaning changed?
- orionsbelt 1y ago
  His point is not that black people are less capable but that DEI policies causing looser standards causes people to question whether a particular black person they encounter in a role is sufficiently qualified given those well known looser standards, and that this is bad for everyone, black people included. You can argue he’s still wrong, but it’s quite clear from the various clips that this is what he is arguing. In another clip, for example, he cited United’s goal of having 50% of pilots being of color or women, as compared to 13% of the population being black and women having less of an interest in careers like being a pilot; ie he has no prejudice against black peoples capabilities but has an issue with lowering hiring standards for any group of people.
  - muddi900 1y ago
    Except none of these are based on fact. All of this has been addressed elsewhere. DEI is Critical Race Theory is Affirmative Action. It is yet another in a long line of politically correct terms used by the American Right to counch their racism. Charlie Kirk's commentary is no different than Rish Limbaugh.
    - orionsbelt 1y ago
      I am not going to argue that many members of the "American Right" are not racist. Many of them are openly and disgustingly so. But we are talking about half the country, and a group that has as many in-group differences as the left. I am not an expert in Charlie Kirk (I barely knew anything about him a week ago), but from the many many clips I have seen of him since, he seems to me to genuinely not be racist. It's not worth debating whether DEI and affirmative action are problematic are not. We probably disagree, and this is a waste of both of our time. But in terms of this story, the simple fact is a journalist should not be misquoting someone. If one thinks he's racist by subtext, one can try to argue that, but at least be honest about what he's literally saying.
      - dudefeliciano 1y ago
        this "half the country" statistic needs to stop being thrown around, of the eligible voters only 64% actually voted, of those about 50% voted republican. Not even a a third of the country.
hackeraccount 1y ago
Embarrassingly, I've read the details on the quote. The short version is that Kirk said something about several individuals which was changed in the "quote" to be about a group. The paraphrase would be if I said, my co-works Bob and John were congenital idiots and I was quoted as saying "All Unix Administrators are congenital idiots" Should she get fired for that kind of thing? Easily yes if she did it in a work product. If she did it for something outside of work? I have no idea. Probably not but nominally she was doing straight news for the Washington Post. The deeper problem is the no one goes into Journalism to do straight news reporting but everyone at least starts off doing that and for most that's all they ever do - but everyone wants the dream; getting paid to tell other people what they think is right and wrong with the world. The only way to get that dream job is to start off doing it for free but it's not hard to see how that might conflict with your day job if your day job is straight news reporting.
yakz 1y ago
It's not an exact quote, but it was on The Charlie Kirk Show, on July 13th 2023. The video is still available, it's around 53:45 in.
mcphage 1y ago
The source seems to be this: https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1679829904026730496?s=20 https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1679829904026730496?s=20
alkyon 1y ago
Here you have it: https://twitter.com/i/status/1965931096539017536 https://twitter.com/i/status/1965931096539017536 The late Mr. Kirk was seriously messed up.
- tim333 1y ago
  Meh. The text quote is not what Kirk says. I hate that style of trying to win an argument by lying about what they said.

muddi900 1y ago

There is nothing uncharacteristic about statement. This is something similar he said about black people. https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ZPr6KwnzA/ https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ZPr6KwnzA/ The benefit of the doubt should go to the author. Why are we pretending that he was not this?

IAmBroom 1y ago
Why should any side get the benefit of the doubt?
- lucyjojo 1y ago
  logical consistency?
- muddi900 1y ago
  In any given conflict, there would be doubt. And one side will have the advantage due to it. Like in sports tv umpiring. Whenever the image is not clear as to what the decision should be, the rules have a carve out on which side whould get the benefit of benefit of that doubt. Otherwise the game will be stuck. In life, where certainty is much more rare, it is a good rule of thumb to handle doubts this way. By OP's own admission, they can't watch every hour and minute of Charlie Kirk's speeches, interviews, and TV appearances. But he has a clear pattern of making remarks such as this. Why would you believe that he did not make that statement? Objectivity does not require anyone be neutral for no reason. It is reasonable to assume that the author is correct.
  - orionsbelt 1y ago
    It’s a misquote - in quotation marks! - for which the full video is available and shows it is a misquote.
    - muddi900 1y ago
      But has the meaning changed?
orionsbelt 1y ago
His point is not that black people are less capable but that DEI policies causing looser standards causes people to question whether a particular black person they encounter in a role is sufficiently qualified given those well known looser standards, and that this is bad for everyone, black people included. You can argue he’s still wrong, but it’s quite clear from the various clips that this is what he is arguing. In another clip, for example, he cited United’s goal of having 50% of pilots being of color or women, as compared to 13% of the population being black and women having less of an interest in careers like being a pilot; ie he has no prejudice against black peoples capabilities but has an issue with lowering hiring standards for any group of people.
- muddi900 1y ago
  Except none of these are based on fact. All of this has been addressed elsewhere. DEI is Critical Race Theory is Affirmative Action. It is yet another in a long line of politically correct terms used by the American Right to counch their racism. Charlie Kirk's commentary is no different than Rish Limbaugh.
  - orionsbelt 1y ago
    I am not going to argue that many members of the "American Right" are not racist. Many of them are openly and disgustingly so. But we are talking about half the country, and a group that has as many in-group differences as the left. I am not an expert in Charlie Kirk (I barely knew anything about him a week ago), but from the many many clips I have seen of him since, he seems to me to genuinely not be racist. It's not worth debating whether DEI and affirmative action are problematic are not. We probably disagree, and this is a waste of both of our time. But in terms of this story, the simple fact is a journalist should not be misquoting someone. If one thinks he's racist by subtext, one can try to argue that, but at least be honest about what he's literally saying.
    - dudefeliciano 1y ago
      this "half the country" statistic needs to stop being thrown around, of the eligible voters only 64% actually voted, of those about 50% voted republican. Not even a a third of the country.

hackeraccount 1y ago

Embarrassingly, I've read the details on the quote. The short version is that Kirk said something about several individuals which was changed in the "quote" to be about a group. The paraphrase would be if I said, my co-works Bob and John were congenital idiots and I was quoted as saying "All Unix Administrators are congenital idiots" Should she get fired for that kind of thing? Easily yes if she did it in a work product. If she did it for something outside of work? I have no idea. Probably not but nominally she was doing straight news for the Washington Post. The deeper problem is the no one goes into Journalism to do straight news reporting but everyone at least starts off doing that and for most that's all they ever do - but everyone wants the dream; getting paid to tell other people what they think is right and wrong with the world. The only way to get that dream job is to start off doing it for free but it's not hard to see how that might conflict with your day job if your day job is straight news reporting.

yakz 1y ago

It's not an exact quote, but it was on The Charlie Kirk Show, on July 13th 2023. The video is still available, it's around 53:45 in.

mcphage 1y ago

The source seems to be this: https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1679829904026730496?s=20 https://x.com/patriottakes/status/1679829904026730496?s=20

alkyon 1y ago

Here you have it: https://twitter.com/i/status/1965931096539017536 https://twitter.com/i/status/1965931096539017536 The late Mr. Kirk was seriously messed up.

tim333 1y ago
Meh. The text quote is not what Kirk says. I hate that style of trying to win an argument by lying about what they said.