{"id":179956,"date":"2017-08-31T18:26:00","date_gmt":"2017-08-31T23:26:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2017\/08\/31\/headline-of-the-day-74\/"},"modified":"2017-08-31T18:26:00","modified_gmt":"2017-08-31T23:26:00","slug":"headline-of-the-day-74","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2017\/08\/31\/headline-of-the-day-74\/","title":{"rendered":"Headline of the Day"},"content":{"rendered":"

Trolling is not Opinion<\/span><\/b><\/a>.<\/p>\n

It is what I consider to be a very well reasoned critique of OP\/ED pages in general, and the New York Times<\/i> opinion page in particular:<\/p>\n

Opinions. Every asshole has one, or something. Opinions are good! People who have no opinions are boring. But what about opinion sections of newspapers? Are they good? Should newspapers even have them?<\/span>

<\/span>First, let\u2019s talk about me, the Leah of Leah Letter. I would like you to know more about me, and feel free to ask me personal questions at any time. One of my first jobs in journalism was in the Opinion section of the New York Times<\/i>. I was mostly in charge of fixing paper jams in the printers and keeping track of Thomas Friedman\u2019s schedule, among other things (fun fact about Thomas Friedman: whenever he sends an email, he makes the subject line \u201cThomas Friedman\u201d).<\/span>

<\/span>\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>Still, I thought the section did some good things during my time there, although I can\u2019t really remember any of it so maybe it wasn\u2019t that good. But I came to understand some things about opinion journalism. A good opinion section is not one that seeks to confirm its readers\u2019 values, but challenge them. A good opinion section is provocative, thoughtful, and delightful. A good opinion section will turn down an op-ed submission from a head of state that doesn\u2019t say anything. A good opinion section does not kowtow to blowhards.<\/span>

<\/span>You might say that the Times<\/i> has a responsibility, in this fiery era, to present opinions that will cause Trump to resign or be impeached. But the Times<\/i> is not a radical, or even particularly progressive, paper. It refused to acknowledge the AIDS crisis in in the \u201880s. It basically started the Iraq War. It could be argued that it helped give rise to Trump by hammering Hillary Clinton on everything it could possibly hammer her on. It didn\u2019t even know what bubble tea was until a few weeks ago. Traditional newspapers are by nature conservative, not wanting to believe anything is happening until there is concrete, or official, proof, which marginalizes the oppressed who do not have means of providing such proof.<\/span>

<\/span>An opinion section is a crucial part of the sad business of a newspaper. Like it or not, a sh%$-ton of people look forward to reading David Brooks, the paragon of family values who married his decades-younger assistant no judgment just stating facts. The politics of idiotic centrists who pontificate on specious social trends closely mirror the politics of most of the paper\u2019s employees: over 50, white, well-educated, and generally disdainful of the young. At the end of the day, though, the Times<\/i> is a content mill, and there are deadlines, and traffic quotas, and column inches to fill. And so sometimes it publishes bullsh%$.<\/span>

<\/span>But there\u2019s been a remarkable uptick in the bullsh%$ published since James Bennet, formerly of the Atlantic<\/i>, became editorial page editor last year. James Bennet is the Spencer Pratt of opinion journalism. This guy loves to troll, and position his writers as martyrs for their bad opinions. He also seems kinda bad<\/a> at the basics of his job (writing and making sure facts are correct).<\/span>

<\/span>\u2026\u2026\u2026<\/span>

<\/span>But the controversial pieces the Opinion section runs under the auspices of fomenting some sort of \u201cconversation\u201d are done so disingenuously. The Times<\/i> is not furthering useful conversation with these bad and wrong op-eds, it is spraying its readers in the eyes with tear gas and then asking them why they\u2019re screaming. They\u2019re not seeking to upend established, calcified viewpoints, but deliberately instigating anger and spreading disinformation in an insincere attempt to \u201cshow both sides.\u201d<\/a> This is particularly egregious when you consider that, post-Trump, the Times has widely marketed itself<\/a> as a crusader for capital-T Truth and an essential component of a healthy democracy. But the Times\u2019 version of the Truth is highly subjective<\/a>, and when it lends credence to vile idiots like Erik Prince or Louise Mensch<\/a>, it loses any semblance of legitimacy.<\/span>

<\/span>People expect a lot from the Times<\/i>, much like they expect Tina Fey to solve the nation\u2019s problems with comedy and then get mad at her when she does jokes. Newspapers are emotional! I know. But it\u2019s fairly insane how out-of-touch the Times\u2019 Opinion section is. Frankly, I\u2019m tired of being trolled<\/span><\/b>.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(Emphasis and %$# mine<\/i>)<\/p>\n

Of course, it doesn’t just apply to newspaper opinion pages.  It also applies to art, entertainment, at least one recently deceased Supreme Court justice, and the leaders of the the oldest and the most recent nuclear powers.<\/p>\n

Just stop trolling.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trolling is not Opinion. It is what I consider to be a very well reasoned critique of OP\/ED pages in general, and the New York Times opinion page in particular: Opinions. Every asshole has one, or something. Opinions are good! People who have no opinions are boring. But what about opinion sections of newspapers? Are …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[464,490,595,623],"class_list":["post-179956","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-good-writing","tag-hack-journalism","tag-society","tag-trolling"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179956"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179956"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179956\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179956"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179956"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179956"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}