L'Affaire Sarah Jeong
Most appropriately, we'll let Kevin Williamson -- hired and then shoved out the door at The Atlantic in the wake of mob clamoring -- explain via NRO:
For some mysterious reason, my name keeps coming up in connection with that of Sarah Jeong, a writer recently hired by the New York Times editorial board. I am not familiar with her work, but there is a social-media campaign currently under way, sometimes using my name, seeking to have her fired from the position in response to some odious and boneheaded tweets that might be summarized as "Derka derka white people."...I assume that the editors of the Times knew exactly who and what Jeong was when they hired her. If not, then it isn't Jeong who needs to be fired -- it's the negligent people who hired her.
If, on the other hand, the Times is more or less satisfied with Jeong, then it should resist the social-media mob campaign to have her dismissed. It is up to institutions to hold the line against mass hysteria and the mob mentality of social media. I don't know much of anything about James Gunn, the director fired from the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise for making a bunch of ghastly jokes, but I do know that Marvel Studios can and should say: "We'll hire who we want." Marvel and the New York Times have the resources and the standing to stand up to this kind of social-media scalp collecting: All they need is the guts. I hope the Times has enough. Berkeley didn't. ABC didn't. Google didn't. A few book publishers I can think of haven't.
I'm also with Williamson on being against firing people after some mob has done an archeological dig through their social media. The same goes for the case of Roseanne's firing, for the entirely...in fact, COMPLETELY FUCKING PREDICTABLE...happenstance of her saying something VERY OFFENSIVE.
Oh, and I do find it ugly, offensive, and fucking mean.
But, come on -- who here believes ABC or anyone there, from the night janitors to the lady in charge, thought Roseanne was some kind of pussycat of gentility and tact?
My tweets:
And getting back to Jeong, another tweet:
I'm not persuaded. If the left gets to have politically limited workplaces such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter and we don't, America gets replaced by the Red Chinese Cultural Revolution.
And Jeong's plentiful tweets tell the story of her character quite well enough.
But then, nobody I know has taken the NYT seriously in decades. They are fake news, and corrupt too. And their other columnists, such as Krugman, aren't any better.
Let's just make sure the taxpayers don't rescue the NYT from their well-deserved final bankruptcy. The marketplace sure won't.
jdgalt at August 2, 2018 10:51 PM
Ridiculous double standards.
This is not trying to censor a Ben Shapiro (something the Times is probably in favor of) or nasty hit pieces on Jordan Peterson.
These are examples of 'speech fighting speech'.
This is accepting an odious person who seemingly violates the espoused, but not acted upon, values of the Times as being anti-racism.
Well, it seems SOME colors of racism are A-OK...and the people calling for her firing are ALSO using their free speech.
Rosanne is an entertainer and a comedienne. Sarah Jeong is hypothetically a journalist. WAY different job descriptions!
One is SUPPOSED to be offensive and edgy. The other is what Sarah Jeong is supposed to do.
I am, unlike Amy, holding the Left to the standards they inflict on the Right: a single tweet, a single grope, a single affair is disqualifying.
Here we have two YEARS of racism...and the Times is fine with that.
One can be a POC racist at the Times. Hell, it seems a resume enhancement. They couldn't find a non-racist Asian tech girl?
But THIS speech by the Times, and THIS hiring has removed any moral authority by the Times on racism, so goodnon them.
FIDO at August 2, 2018 11:01 PM
No terribly strong feelings, but the Twitter feed was never as devoted to a single topic as it was to Jeong between 3pm & midnight Thursday.
Crid at August 3, 2018 2:47 AM
As of 3am PST, the topic is still foamy on twitter.
It's been said that nothing explains so many human mysteries as does tail.
Crid at August 3, 2018 2:57 AM
Jeong may nonetheless be Thursday's second worst story for journalism.
Crid at August 3, 2018 4:03 AM
Funny how the New York Times is so forgiving of social media misconduct of the left, but not of the right.
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:22 AM
Jeong is also anti free speech -
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjpUKh7VsAAwLSq.jpg
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:23 AM
"I’m glad we’ve all come to a consensus that people shouldn’t be punished for a tweet that can be perceived as offensive, and I fully expect that consensus to last until a conservative is caught with an offensive tweet."
https://twitter.com/tedfrank/status/1025218767217979397
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:29 AM
New York Times Stands By Recent Editorial Board Hire Joseph Stalin Despite Criticism Of Mass Murder
https://babylonbee.com/news/new-york-times-stands-by-recent-editorial-board-hire-joseph-stalin-despite-criticism-of-mass-murder/
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:37 AM
Journalistic principles -
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Djohw7eU8AAkpqn.jpg:large
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:44 AM
BREAKING: Huffington Post fires new editor after extensive searches reveal no tweets attacking white people.
https://twitter.com/neontaster/status/1025077567802552321
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:58 AM
No, Sarah Jeong needs to be fired.
That is exactly what the left does with the right. The left believes there is no such thing as forgiveness. If you say something "not politically correct" (even if factually correct), you need to be fired from your job and never hold a job in that particular field again. Even if you apologize for your soi-disant transgression, you must still be fired and have your life ruined.
That is the standard that leftists have insisted upon and we must hold them to it.
And I look forward to the outcome, because I have no doubt whatsoever that the left will be destroyed by this standard far sooner than the right will be.
Patrick at August 3, 2018 5:06 AM
Villager: An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.
Tevye: Very good. That way the whole world will be blind and toothless.
Conan the Grammarian at August 3, 2018 5:49 AM
Of course Kevin Williamson is defending Sarah Jeong. They both hate white people.
dj at August 3, 2018 5:57 AM
There are three problems with Jeong. The first two are obvious: (1) she's a loathsome human being, and (2) the obvious double standard. Problem (3) is that, as is the case with most fanatics, her writing (from what I reviewed last night) is so entirely predictable that a computer program could generate it. If this is what passes for journalism at the NYT now, there is no value added over watching cat videos on Youtube.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2018 6:11 AM
Oy, I was about to submit the above, and realized that in the prove-you-are-human box, I had typed "cats" instead of "cars". What can I say, it's early.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2018 6:13 AM
Butthurt about this very quickly turns amusing.
Crid at August 3, 2018 6:43 AM
This is all Maoism from the Left.
You'll be eaten alive, too, as soon as they decide you are acting "in bad faith", and therefore you can be unpersoned and denied employment. This is the new magic totem word they're using: they have declared there is no middle ground and we live in distinct, incompatible bubbles - and only theirs is the one of people who are actual humans.
"This 'Advice Goddess' says she wants to give advice, but she's got some inappropriate views, so it must be that she's acting 'in bad faith'. Take away her income!"
El Verde Loco at August 3, 2018 6:46 AM
Five comments in this stack, five in the next... Snoop seems especially butthurt this morning.
Or are metric inappropriate?
Crid at August 3, 2018 8:12 AM
Jeong is also anti free speech -
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DjpUKh7VsAAwLSq.jpg
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 4:23 AM
This is too much. The concept of free speech is a racist dogwistle (which only she can hear) but actual overt racism is a A OK.
Shtetl G at August 3, 2018 8:53 AM
The Left has thrown out Christianity with its admonitions to forgive, to remember that all are sinners (let he who is without sin cast the first stone), and all fall short of the glory of God. They imagine that fierce adherence to this social justice ideology makes them perfect but it does not--if anything it makes them more vile and dangerous. Any belief system that causes you to spew hate and advocate that a certain class of people die or be exterminated is a vile belief. They imagine that the badness of the white person justifies their hate yet they cannot point to white sins except in the vaguest way ("systemic racism! hate speech!) and further want to blame current living people for slavery before the civil war. They have lost their minds. Zero tolerance for human foibles leads only to witch hunts.
cc at August 3, 2018 9:07 AM
I wonder how many "old white men" that Sarah Jeong hates so much might have served in the Korean War, which is, as we know, the only reason she could have come to the United States in the first place and avail herself of an education at our most prestigious university. Which she probably didn't have to pay for.
Patrick at August 3, 2018 9:11 AM
I'm betting a lot of Asians are cringing right now, seeing that Jeong is exposing the casual racism and snobbery so common in their community.
What she's written is typical of a lot of upwardly mobile Asians, and especially the women. They're often racist to an almost comical extreme and painfully snobbish and status conscious.
You can bet that anything she's written publicly about whites is mirrored by similar sentiments towards blacks and latinos.
melmo at August 3, 2018 9:36 AM
The thing is, I believe Roseanne did NOT tweet something racist. She says that she didn't know that Valerie Jarrett was of black ancestry---and I didn't know that either for a long time. It's not racist (insulting, sure) to say that people look like monkeys, because of course we do. It's only racist if you apply it to a group of people who have regularly been dehumanized by specific comparisons to monkeys. It's like saying you are cruel and able-ist if you invite someone over to visit and tell them to take the steps to your place on the second floor, when you had no idea that they physically unable to climb stairs.
RigelDog at August 3, 2018 10:05 AM
Like Stephen Colbert and the other shrinking-audience late-night TV shows, the New York Times has learned their best chance at survival is to capture a larger part of a smaller audience by telling them exactly what they want to hear.
Seriously, how many conservative readers does/did the Times have versus liberal? The Times is just trying to keep the lights on.
I'm not even particularly conservative and I had to drop my subscription.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 3, 2018 10:09 AM
Her Tweets are the gift that keeps on giving:
https://twitter.com/LibertarianBlue/status/1025397292306780160
Sixclaws at August 3, 2018 10:18 AM
> Five comments in this stack, five in the next... Snoop
I didn't know you could count that high! Congrats. But don't worry, I'll be back with more soon.
In the meantime, here's my autograph, especially for you -
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a0/1c/19/a01c192435d2f8b9316ef4680f72af8b--snoopy-love-charlie-brown-snoopy.jpg
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 10:23 AM
She also made many "kill more men" and "f*ck the police" type of tweets -
http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/03/nyt-sarah-jeong-cop-men-tweets/
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 10:32 AM
Amy's schtick, if you wish to call it that, is that of being 'edgy', particularly in her book titles.
So as someone Lefty but Edgy, she fears that if we hold to this standard, one day they may come for her and her tweets.
Alas, I am on the Right. They are already coming for me. So Amy's idea of forbearance and call to 'not push this meme any further' essentially means that she advocates that the Right allow themselves to continue to be punched in the face by the Left because the Left LOVES using this against the Right.
No thanks. I read in one of her books about not taking shit like that.
It's just Amy is on the protected side of that double standard...for now.
I am open to hear how she would make the Left realize their crapulence and stop. Alas, I feel I may grow old waiting.
FIDO at August 3, 2018 10:37 AM
Should the New York Times fire Jeong? Hell no. They need to take pride in the fact that they hired her, and make her the face of the newspaper. They need to print here rants every day, above the fold on the front page, in 30-point type. This way, there can no longer be any doubt in anyone's mind about what the New York Times really is.
There is no need for anyone to argue with any of Jeong's juvenile rants. She condemns herself every time she takes to the keyboard. Spread it far and wide.
Cousin Dave at August 3, 2018 12:00 PM
Polemarchus: "justice is the art which gives good to friends and evil to enemies"
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 2:18 PM
Left-Wing Rage Mob Comes After Andrew Sullivan After He Suggests Anti-White Racism Is Still Racism
https://www.dailywire.com/news/34021/left-wing-rage-mob-comes-after-andrew-sullivan-ben-shapiro
Snoopy at August 3, 2018 2:21 PM
Amy, as far as I know, is a libertarian, not a leftoid. I'm also not sure that her idea of not taking shit from people includes getting them fired from their jobs.
mpetrie98 at August 3, 2018 3:55 PM
If she’s the best the NYT can find, journalism is in a sad state. She wrote about Pokémon.
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/07/12/pokemon-go-get-outta-here/pokemon-go-connects-us-to-our-cities-and-neighbors
KateC at August 3, 2018 5:45 PM
She should stay. Keep her in front of the rest of us as the face of NYT and journalism.
Besides, Trump could use the votes.
Richard Aubrey at August 3, 2018 7:01 PM
I won't bother looking for evidence of it; but some how or other I feel that Sarah Jeong would be in favor of others being fired for THEIR tweets - so, why shouldn't she?
charles at August 3, 2018 7:32 PM
Mpetrie98, remember recent history? In the last presidential election Amy stumped quite heavily for Hillary. She talked about how great Mitt Romney was when he wasn't an option but strongly supported Hillary. As for the election where Mitt was an option, she supported Obama.
Ben at August 3, 2018 7:46 PM
> In the last presidential election
> Amy stumped quite heavily for
> Hillary
The fuck?
You guys are especially needy today.
Crid at August 3, 2018 8:59 PM
@Snoopy - She also made many "kill more men" and "f*ck the police" type of tweets
yep, it's apparent that her claim, and the NYT's statement, that she was only responding to trolls in kind is a lie. She's made plenty of unprovoked attacks on whites, Christians, police, and others she hates.
She seems like a very angry and bigoted person. But the NYT still wants to hire her, so she's all theirs now.
What's more interesting (disturbing) is the response from Progressives who insist that a Berkeley and Harvard educated Asian American woman, and now NYT Editorials Editor, cannot be deemed racist because only 'whites' can be blamed for racism, even when subject to blatantly racist attacks.
You have to wonder what end-game they foresee for this state of affairs. How could you ever have a 'diverse', 'inclusive', 'equitable' society when one half is condemned as categorically racist and the other is rewarded for harassing and degrading them? It's absurd.
st. mark at August 3, 2018 9:14 PM
Amy, as far as I know, is a libertarian, not a leftoid. I'm also not sure that her idea of not taking shit from people includes getting them fired from their jobs.
As a non-Ideologue writer, she BETTER be for free speech and she has been there criticizing the Left at some of their excesses.
And as a 'hip edgy writer' she is all in favor of other people having norms, because, hey, how can you be on the edge if there ARE no edges?
But civilization is something we do together.
If the Left wants Free Speech, they have to give it to me too. They will not.
If the Left wants to have forgiveness for past flaws in their people, they have to offer it to the Right. Currently, the 'statute of limitations' on prior sins which can be held accountable on the Right is 40+ years (Roy Moore).
Even Amy refused to offer any kind of grace to a Roy Moore despite his 'sins' being almost older than she is. Hmm!
And yet she calls upon forgiving two years of horribly racist tweets a mere two years ago. How is what Roy Moore did inexcusable but what she did somehow just a lark?
The Left wants all the benfits of civilized norms, but pays none of the costs. They are free riding.
Trump symbolizes the fact that the Lefts free ride is over and the Left owes a HUGE past due bill in societal norms.
So as far as being gracious and forgiving for open racists who hate white people and are GIVEN a huge microphone...I'm going with 'No' on that.
And note: if this was a Thomas Friedman or a Paul Krugman who ALREADY had a job, it would be understandable that the Times would defend THEM over a few obnoxious tweets.
But this was an OUTSIDER that they INVITED in, racism and all. So it isn't a matter of her being FIRED, it is that she should never have been hired at all, which is a FAR different thing.
The difference between stripping a citizen of their citizenship and not allowing an immigrant to cross the border: far different things.
FIDO at August 4, 2018 2:34 AM
"It's just Amy is on the protected side of that double standard...for now"
Jealous.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 4, 2018 9:14 AM
"The Left has thrown out Christianity "
Probably all that racism, slavery, pedophilia, theft, rape, stoning, and forcing the natives to convert or die finally caught up with the fable. In which case, the "left" got something right.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at August 4, 2018 9:32 AM
Nah. Trump symbolizes that people were mad and pitched a collective temper tantrum. Unless and until the people hold both sides to an impartial standard, nothing will change.
Until the people get rid of representatives and senators who enter Congress with minimal savings and leave with millions in the bank; who have never worked a day outside of government, media, or academia; who spend their time building monuments to themselves instead of building a country; and who would rather win the argument than govern, nothing will change.
Once the status quo is restored, Trump will be reviled by the accepted historians as the man who tried to take over America and whatever identity group is in favor then will be hailed as the heroes who stood up to him. The victors write history, haven't you heard?
Conan the Grammarian at August 4, 2018 9:35 AM
The gloves have come off, and they're staying off. And it's about time, because the left took theirs off decades ago.
We're now at civil war. And they shot first.
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/08/everybodys-alt-right-now.html
jdgalt at August 4, 2018 10:53 AM
The victors write history, haven't you heard?
Nonsense.
The survivors and the Academics write the histories and in the later case, a bigger set of losers can't be found. Unable to cut it in any competitive environment, they escape to summers off, modest wages, tenure (maybe) and academic masturbation.
To wit, three examples:
Hatshepsut: First female pharaoh. She made Egypt her bitch for 20 years until she died. No one crossed her and she changed the Empire. But she died and the pimpweasels who survived her tried to destroy her legacy. They certainly weren't any definition of 'victors' that I know. Lickspittles seldom are. (another good term for Academics)
Tiberius: He ran purges of the Senate and died a Boss. A paranoid Boss, but a Boss. No one dared cross him. His 'histories' came decades after his death by the ancestors of people who were beaten by Tiberius and Sejanus.
Stalin: The Academy is working themselves into a frenzy trying to white wash this guy and Castro...and yet we all know exactly who he was. A murderer, a tyrant and a major league dick.
So this is a simplistic cliché which actually doesn't illuminate.
FIDO at August 5, 2018 3:24 AM
You didn't pay attention to anything Amy said in the last election Crid? Corrupt adult and all that? I know you are still in Trump derangement syndrome but the facts are the facts. Amy stumped quite frequently for Hillary.
"Nah. Trump symbolizes that people were mad and pitched a collective temper tantrum. Unless and until the people hold both sides to an impartial standard, nothing will change."
You're wrong Conan. Trump is people holding both sides to the same standard. You may not like that standard but it is the one Democrats have normalized for decades.
Ben at August 5, 2018 9:53 AM
Leave a comment