Media

It's Official: Linguistic Intent No Longer Matters at The New York Times

Pandemic reporter fired after 45 years for using the N-word in context on a work trip in 2019, as the paper's management buckles to yet another newsroom revolt.

|

The New York Times on Friday forced out its lead pandemic reporter, 45-year* newsroom veteran Donald McNeil Jr., because the Grey Lady's management, under public pressure from more than 150 employees, decided that when it comes to speaking certain radioactive words, not only does intent not matter, any utterance is potentially a one-strike offense.

"We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent," Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet and Managing Editor Joe Kahn explained bluntly in a memo Friday.

McNeil, 67, went as a representative of the Times on a 2019 trip with American high school students in Peru. There, according to his farewell note to colleagues—which, tellingly, was the first time the context of his career-ending comments had ever been reported during the 8-day life cycle of this journalism-world controversy—McNeil "was asked at dinner by a student whether I thought a classmate of hers should have been suspended for a video she had made as a 12-year-old in which she used a racial slur. To understand what was in the video, I asked if she had called someone else the slur or whether she was rapping or quoting a book title. In asking the question, I used the slur itself."

After receiving complaints back then from at least six parents or students—one of whom said "He was a racist….He used the 'N' word, said horrible things about black teenagers, and said white supremacy doesn't exist"—the Times "conducted a thorough investigation and disciplined Donald for statements and language that had been inappropriate and inconsistent with our values," according to a company statement January 28. "We found he had used bad judgment by repeating a racist slur in the context of a conversation about racist language."

Added Baquet in an internal memo: "During the trip, he made offensive remarks, including repeating a racist word in the context of discussing an incident that involved racist language. When I first heard the story, I was outraged and expected I would fire him. I authorized an investigation and concluded his remarks were offensive and that he showed extremely poor judgment, but that it did not appear to me that his intentions were hateful or malicious. I believe that in such cases people should be told they were wrong and given another chance."

That's what Baquet believed last week, anyway.

This week, the newsroom revolted via a remarkable group letter in which more than 150 staffers at one of the country's leading newspapers argued that word-choice intentions are "irrelevant," because "what matters is how an act makes the victims feel." Signees, declaring themselves "outraged and in pain" and "disrespected," demanded a reinvestigation of the 2019 incident, an apology to the newsroom, and an organizational study into how racial biases affect editorial decisions. They also alleged that the controversy had surfaced new internal complaints about McNeil demonstrating "bias against people of color in his work and in interactions with colleagues over a period of years."

Rather than blanch at that suggested new journalistic standard—if the paper is no longer recognizing the linguistic use-mention distinction, then all it will take to prompt a vast scrubbing of the archives are enough offended "victims" of articles like these—The New York Times Company leadership (Baquet, Publisher A.G. Sulzberger, Chief Executive Meredith Kopit Levien) responded to the letter with anguished obsequiousness.

"We welcome this input. We appreciate the spirit in which it was offered and we largely agree with the message," they wrote. "We are determined to learn the right lessons from this incident and take concrete actions to improve our workplace culture, ensure the integrity of our journalism, and examine the way we manage behavioral problems among members of the staff."

The writing was on the wall. And not just for Donald McNeil.

Friday also saw the resignation of Times podcast producer Andy Mills, co-creator of The Daily and producer of the initially acclaimed and then heavily criticized series Caliphate, one of whose central characters turned out to be a probable fabulist. The two personnel cases (which like all personnel cases are very difficult to assess accurately from the outside looking in), while being vastly different in underlying causes, nevertheless contain important overlap and even connective tissue.

After the Times began to distance itself away from Caliphate in December, many journalists inside and outside the newsroom began grumbling that Mills was not being punished enough, especially compared to the series's star reporter, Rukmini Callimachi, who was demoted and subject to a lengthy internal review. There was, critics alleged, a "sexist double standard," made all the more intolerable by a re-popularized 2018 New York magazine article about Mills' aggressive sexual flirtations with colleagues years before at WNYC, for which he had been punished at the time.

In January, more than 20 National Public Radio affiliates signed a joint letter of complaint about The Daily and Mills, citing among a litany of complaints his workplace relationships with women.

It was this months-long controversy, much of it played out on social media, that Dean Baquet was alluding to in his initial responses to the public Donald McNeil revelations. "Some people think we have been too tolerant in disciplining high-profile journalists," he wrote in his January 28 memo. "I also welcome that conversation. Fair treatment has to be the foundation of the diverse and equitable newsroom we are building."

Further connecting the two cases, and perhaps even influencing what was likely an internal Times leak to The Daily Beast about a typically confidential personnel matter, is the fact that McNeil himself starred on The Daily literally the two days before the Beast story ran. Times journalists, reflecting the zeitgeist of modern newsrooms, place an exalted emphasis on the value of their "platforms," and The Daily is among the paper's most prestigious.

"Despite The Times's seeming commitment to diversity and inclusion," Times staffers wrote in their letter, "we have given a prominent platform—a critical beat covering a pandemic disproportionately affecting people of color—to someone who chose to use language that is offensive and unacceptable by any newsroom's standards."

Mills in his resignation letter emphasized that his decision was not over the Caliphate controversy, but the way that his past workplace behavior was being re-scrutinized and tendentiously characterized, including publicly by his own colleagues.

"The allegations on Twitter quickly escalated to the point where my actual shortcomings and past mistakes were replaced with gross exaggerations and baseless claims," he maintained. "Several people have even alleged that I am a predator and a dangerous threat to my colleagues. I have been transformed into a symbol of larger societal evils. As a journalist, it has been especially discouraging and upsetting to see fellow journalists make such claims or retweet them…. As the pressure of this online campaign has grown to encompass some staffers of The Times, it has led to a climate where, even though I still love the mission of this important institution, I feel it is in the best interest of both myself and my team that I leave the company at this time."

McNeil's resignation letter, meanwhile, exudes the unsettling aroma of a struggle session.

"Originally, I thought the context in which I used this ugly word could be defended. I now realize that it cannot," he wrote. "It is deeply offensive and hurtful. The fact that I even thought that I could defend it itself showed extraordinarily bad judgment. For that I apologize….My lapse of judgment has hurt my colleagues in Science, the hundreds of people who trusted me to work with them closely during this pandemic, the team at 'The Daily' that turned to me during this frightening year, and the whole institution, which put its confidence in me and expected better."

If McNeil thought his prostration would engender grace from his workplace executioners, he was likely mistaken, going by this article from NPR media reporter David Folkenflik:

In each case, however, the actions of Times news leaders appeared to baffle many of their colleagues. For several who spoke to NPR, it was the fact these circumstances were allowed to fester for so long. For others, the reversals defied common sense.

In the words of one knowledgeable Times newsroom staffer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, "two boils were lanced today."

These developments have import far beyond midtown Manhattan. The collapse of the use-mention distinction with certain words (evident in the Times' own pre-firing headline about how McNeil had "used" a "racial slur"), combined with a zero-tolerance approach toward offenders who haven't caught up to the new rules, has been a growing phenomenon in and outside of media for several years now. As I wrote in a 2019 piece,

John Schnatter, the outspoken conservative founder of pizza chain Papa John's, was forced to resign as chairman of his own company in 2018 after vividly describing acts of racist violence during a role-playing exercise that was designed to increase workplace sensitivity. Netflix fired Chief Communications Officer Jonathan Friedland that year not for being a racist, but by using the n-word in a company meeting about what words to avoid. A 23-year-old Chipotle employee named Dominique Moran was fired in late 2018 after a video went viral of her telling two black customers, "You gotta pay 'cause you never have money when you come in." (It turned out later that one of the men indeed specialized in making videos of himself dining and dashing from restaurants, after which Chipotle offered Moran her job back. She declined.)

You can get suspended from university jobs for even saying words that sound like a racial slur, but are not. Placing that level of consequence-heavy fraughtness on speech does not encourage productive conversations about negative collective demonization of certain groups based on their immutable characteristics.

Scores of professional journalists have asserted publicly as a matter of plain fact that Donald McNeil is a "racist," one of the most grave accusations in contemporary life. This is the extent of his bosses' generosity toward his career, after their abrupt, pressure-induced reversal of disciplinary policy: "Donald joined The Times in 1976 and has done much good reporting over four decades. But we feel that this is the next right step."

I have almost never used the N-word in my private life, let alone in my public work. (It is not hard to find video of me on television wincing at its mention.) I do not seethe with even one drop of resentment that it would probably be frowned upon if I walked down the street shouting N.W.A. lyrics. But on those few occasions that I have written the word, it was not to "use a racial slur," it was to highlight the too-common evil of racism in my childhood environment, and to attempt to have an honest conversation about where we are today.

It is gratifying to work for a publication that not only values free speech, but considers the subject a core coverage area. What's truly regretful, even alarming, is that that approach has become the exception, not the rule, in modern journalism.

* (Originally said "47-year".)

NEXT: The NFL Challenged Conventional COVID-19 Wisdom and Kept Playing

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Sort’a makes me wish I was a college President so I could fire anyone using the word “Deplorable” in any sense, as well as “Redneck” , and other such slurs.

    Seems only fair.

    1. I would fire anyone or expel them for using white as a pejorative, as in “white supremacy” by way of example.

      1. This. “Racist” and “white supremacist” have become the racial slurs du jour.

        The intent of calling someone these names is to dehumanize, just like the racial slurs of old. The intent is to put the target “back in their place” when they get to uppity, just like the racial slurs of old. The intent is to inflict emotional pain, just like the racial slurs of old. They’re only applied to a particular race, just like the racial slurs of old. The use of these words is coming from hatred, just like the racial slurs of old.

        1. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job But a good
          eaning opportunity.. Click here for more info.

        1. Watching disaffected right-wing culture war casualties nip at the ankles of their betters can be entertaining.

          Carry on, clingers . . . but only so far and so long as your betters permit, as usual.

          1. I don’t know who you’re talking about. I, unlike you, have no “betters.”

            1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received dfy exactly $20845 last month And from this and home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online nam by follow instruction on the given website……….. Visit Here

          2. I’m going to give you the credit of just being some miserable troll. But if you’re not, you really think like this, you’re the most shit-assed bigot I’ve ever seen on this board. You are the most smug, least self reflective, most holier than thou scum I’ve ever witnessed. I lack sufficient adjectives to plumb the vile depths of your burnt-up soul. To actually make contact with you would provide the opportunity to experience the ineffable sweetness of caving your head in.

            1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received dfy exactly $20845 last month from this and home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online nam by follow instruction on the given website……….. Visit Here

            2. I suppose I have to concede that it’s effective trolling when it: a) is meticulously persistent and b) always effective in generating a response.

              In the Revs’ case, it is remarkably ugly and offensive but hey, he keeps the mask up, and that’s good trolling ain’t it, Rev?

              BTW, Rev, has anybody ever accused you of stealing MovieBob’s schtick? Because that’s almost perfectly what you’re doing. He takes it all the way into eugenics territory, though. You’re kind of missing a beat there…

              1. The Democrats disqualification goes far beyond the psychiatric restrictions that federal law currently imposes on gun ownership, which are already overly broad but QWEr apply only to people who have undergone court-ordered treatment…READ MORE

                1. Trump Lawyers Argue,House Democrats are proposing to limit the next round of Covid-19 relief payments to households earning less than $200,000, after criticism that President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus EWqa package would benefit the rich……READ MORE COMMENT

        2. Hey! I resemble that comment.

      2. An emphasis on words over context and meaning has been a common, if not odd, cultural phenomenon in America. Hence the preoccupation with “bad words”, “inappropriate words”, etc. In recent years, it has been getting worse, with the puritanical underpinnings of the nation showing. This would be no more than a curiosity if it weren’t for the fact that the whole English speaking world, and some other countries, now take their language cues from America.

        I can definitely understand black people being particularly sensitive to the use of words that have been weaponised against them for centuries. But I fear that completely eliminating words, regardless of how they are used, also wipes out the memory and historical context of those words. A counter productive exercise.

        For all I know, the paper may have been looking for an excuse to fire the journalist and could be using this as a pretext. Or maybe, the journalist really is racist and behaves offensively. But using the mention of a word as the sole reason to fire someone puts me in mind of 1984 rather than some inclusive utopia.

    2. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working vfe online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do…….. Visit……….. Visit Here

    3. You got the right ‘ma brotha’!

    4. US Dollar Rain Earns upto $550 to $750 per day by google fantastic job oppertunity provide for our community pepoles who,s already using facebook to earn money 85000$ every month and more through facebook and google new project to create money at home withen few hours.Everybody can get this job now and start earning online by just open this site and then go through instructions to get started……….HERE? Check my site.

    5. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do…….. Visit……….. Visit Here

    6. Redneck is a slur Jacobin civil rights activists first applied to dead royalists in Paris in the Year Zero.

      It has since been culturally appropriated

      https://imgur.com/a/Q3pCmVg

    7. I have just received my 3rd paycheck which said that $16285 that i have made just in one month by working online over my laptop. this job is amazing and its regular earnings are much better than my regular office job. join this job now and start making money online easily by just use this link…….INFORMATION USA HOME JOB.

    8. I’m still working on understanding the rationale of why it is forbidden for some people to say some words but other people are allowed to say those very same words. I still haven’t got it so I’m guessing I’m really a troglodyte in disguise.

  2. Oh bullshit, his use of the word and it’s context are a red herring.

    “He was a racist….He used the ‘N’ word, said horrible things about black teenagers, and said white supremacy doesn’t exist”

    That’s what this is about. He hadnt sufficiently bowed to the woke ideology du jour, and any deviation from the hive mind must be stamped out.

    While we sit here and discuss the nuances of intent and linguistics, the cultural revolution marches on.

    1. I doubt he did any of that besides the slur.

      1. I doubt he said those exact things, too. I would guess that he gave some resistance to the ideas that America is built on white supremacy and everything’s racist. That marked him for take-down. If he hadn’t had said the word ‘nigger’, then it would have been a flirtatious intern he made a pass at, or laughing in a comedy club when the comedian made a joke with the word ‘faggot’… the guy would have gotten rolled-over regardless of what transgression they chose to exploit.

        1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received dfy exactly $20845 last month And from this and home job. Join now this job and start making extra cash online nam by follow instruction on the given website……….. Visit Here

      2. And he turned a co-worker into a newt.

        1. Yeah, but I heard he got better.

      3. He didn’t say or do any of that other shit. In these incidents, whatever the original offense is claimed to be always becomes the starting gun for everyone to throw their imaginations into overdrive and make up whatever additional offenses they like.

    2. Would it be better if he said white supremacy does exist? I.e. that whites are supreme?

      1. Biden says Trump should no longer receive classified intelligence briefings.President Joe Biden doesn’t believe former President Donald Trump should receive classified intelligence briefings, EWqa as is tradition for past presidents, citing Trump’s “erratic behavior unrelated to the insurrection………READ MORE

      2. Critical Race Theory means that one race is critical, right?

        1. Critical of only one race. Can’t mean critical as in critical thinking since that thinking is no longer taught in schools.

    3. Every rap song that uses the word should then be banned and the musical group’s contracts immediately terminated. Every black who calls another black the “n” word (which happens quite frequently) should be fired from their jobs.

  3. “Netflix fired Chief Communications Officer Jonathan Friedland that year not for being a racist, but by using the n-word in a company meeting about what words to avoid.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYkbqzWVHZI

  4. I don’t see why we Koch / Reason libertarians should be alarmed by any of this. All those NYT employees likely agree with us on open borders so they’d never call us racist or get us fired.

    #ImmigrationAboveAll

  5. Just say “fuck,” instead, it would be less controversial now.

      1. Would you please watch your fucking language.

        1. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. FGb Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website.

          This is what I do…….. Jobs App

        2. I am now making extra $19k or more every month from home by doing very simple and easy job online from home. I have received exactly $20845 last month from this home job. JNh Join now this job and start making extra cash online by follow instruction on the given website.

          This is what I do…….. Jobs App

  6. There is no reasoning with these people. They will not stop, unless they are stopped.

    1. P.S.

      Nigger

      1. lulz

        Stalinists gonna stalin.

      2. No, the correct answer was “Nagger”.

        1. Ohhhhhhh….Oh, nagger, of course. Naggers. Right.

      3. Do you realize how many people are wounded by your usage??
        How many lives you’ve ruined and erased by that utterance??

        I…I can’t even with this. I’m literally shaking.

        And I would like to take this opportunity to tell all my weak, sensitive, black allies that *I* am not like that, since this, like all else, is ultimately about how good I am.
        /sjw

  7. At least he didn’t misgender anyone.

    1. Indeed, misgendering can also be very traumatic. Many Reason commenters continue to refer to me as “he / him” — even though I’ve repeatedly clarified I’m nonbinary and use “they / them.”

      #MisgenderingIsViolence

      1. I identify as Napoleon, and my pronouns are “your highness” and “your majesty”.

        1. You’re not Napoleon, you’re an imposter.

          I should know, because I, myself, am Napoleon.

          1. Well, ***I*** am Known As “The Uber-Master of Space,Time, and Dimension, and All-Powerful Booger Beams”… AND I blow booger beams in YOUR general direction!

            1. Are you the one responsible for the Jewish space lasers then? Oy. Verklempt.

              1. ver·klempt

                adjectiveINFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN
                overcome with emotion.

                Who, I learned something new today!

              2. Well, I’m #1. And I have to look out for #1. Considering that I know who I am, #1 should be considered a punishable vulgar slur.

                1. Duke of New York, A #1…

          2. I’m Henry the Eighth. I am. I am.

            1. Do you know Sam I Am, I AM? Do you LIKE Sam I Am, I AM? Would you like him with a goat, would you like him on a boat?

          3. You should read “The Three Christs of Ypsilanti”, in which a 50s psychoanalyst, realizing he is in charge of a mental health facility that contains no less than THREE patients under the delusion that they were in fact, Jesus Christ, saw an opportunity for fun and profit.

            The books contains little by way of actual therapy or help for these unfortunates, but the guy was correct that it would make an entertaining book.

          4. I am Spartacus.

        2. I’m not Napolean, nor do I identify as Napolean. But my pronouns are also “his majesty”, or in a pinch “m’lord” or “Himself”.

          Sadly, I was slow on the uptake for this..

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/10/07/a-university-told-students-to-select-their-gender-pronouns-one-chose-his-majesty/

          I’m waiting for someone to have the balls to use “massa” as their pronoun.

          I briefly considered copying that paragon of virtue Idi Amin for my pronoun selection, but decided it was too specific and too much of a mouthful…” “His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC, DSO, MC, CBE, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular”

      2. Apologies for misgendering you. I always assumed your pronouns were “that/that.”

      3. My preferred pronoun is “nigger”.

        1. It would be interesting how one could respond to your preferred pronoun. Would you have to justify your identification? Could you be accused of being a racist?
          Maybe cultural appropriation. But if you wore the badge hard, Like ‘Since BLM I see WE are all the same, WE are all …’ who in woke nation could take it away?
          If conservative blacks can now be white supremacist wouldn’t your identification be the correct juxtaposition of that assertion?
          Nice one.

            1. You mean like Dolezal and Kamala?

      4. A singular person is never they / them. But you are welcome to “it.”

      1. Yes but how do we really know he’s transgender?

        1. All it takes is a proclamation that one is transgender. One need not pursue any medical treatments like hormones or surgery. One need not even change one’s choice of attire or appearance. It need not even be a “permanent” decision, as one is allowed to be gender-fluid by proclamation.

          “Possible steps in a gender transition may or may not include changing your clothing, appearance, name, or the pronoun people use to refer to you (like “she,” “he,” or “they”).”

          “Some, but not all, transgender people undergo medical treatments to make their bodies more congruent with their gender identity”

          https://transequality.org/issues/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-transgender-people

          Given these “rules”, it seems only a matter of time before some male former college basketball players will “identify as transgender women” and try to get picked up in the WNBA. Or soccer players on WNT.

          1. Or get around California’s gender-equity requirements for corporate boards and wage equality. If every male on your board and every male employee can “identify” (by simply proclaiming it to be so) as a woman, problem solved, right?

          2. And perhaps almost 100% of the male prison population will start identifying as women and demanding to be placed into women’s prisons?

    2. Fortunately, he got lucky made pretty good guesses, and got e genders right on everyone.

  8. From the above article…

    …argued that word-choice intentions are “irrelevant,” because “what matters is how an act makes the victims feel.”

    Words are now “an act”! And “how the victim feels” about it now is the end-all and be-all!!! This stinks to the highest heavens!!!

    1. Fuck off sarcfaggot

      1. Goldilicks Girlshit LIKES it when “how the victim feels” about it now is the end-all and be-all!!! What a surprise!

        1. Doesn’t it suck having to constantly remember to switch back and forth between your cum crusted socks, sarc?

          1. Doesn’t it hurt you when your brain is SOOO clouded by hate, that you can no longer communicate coherently?

            1. So broken, sarc.

              1. Goldilicks Girlshit, I’m sorry that your brain… CERTAINLY your sense of ethics, morality, and decency… Are so badly broken! Read this book, it might help you get started on fixing yourself! M. Scott Peck, The People of the Lie, https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684848597/reasonmagazinea-20/

                1. Wouldn’t thing be so much easier if you could just sit there with your handle of Crown, and not constantly stress about logging in, and logging out, and logging in, and logging out? Shitposting without stress is a whole other world. Don’t you think, sarc?

                  1. He can’t afford Crown.

                    1. You are probably right.

                      “Old Smuggler” is likely more along the lines of something that fits in his welfare budget. That shit tastes like powdered ice tea and hand sanitizer which — actually, when you think about it — probably explains sarc’s brain damage.

                  2. It’s much easier to flag and refresh

    2. I mean, the usual caveat, “NY Times is a private employer, no Government Almighty 1st-Amendment issues involved”, yada yada…

      But THIS is the type of thing that drives the “moderate middle” to join up with bat-shit-crazy, loony-tunes, REAL racist right-wingers, in anger and despair!

      Whether the NY Times realizes it or not, they are helping Alex Jones get elected as our next POTUS!!! And for THAT, FUCK YOU, NY Times!!!!

      1. How much whiskey do you have to drink to really get into the brain addled syphilitic personality of this sock, eh sarc?

        1. How much self-righteousness do You imbibe every waking second of Your (supposedly) Magnificent Existence, Goldilicks Girlshit? I’d rather be a drunk than a smug asshole!

          1. Or, best of both worlds: a drunk asshole. Which is exactly what you are, because that’s exactly what you’d have to be to waste your day on an anonymous comment board pretending to be two, or three different people.

          2. And I believe the word you were looking for, but lost, is the same word you tried to lecture me about the other day.

            What was that word? Smarmy?

          3. So no denial that you’re a drunk ass and this is a sock, huh sarc?

            1. The dumb ass cannot deny it. He got into one of his typical stupid back-and-forth exchanges yesterday, and then right in the middle of it, instead of responding with his standard syphilitic alter-ego, he responded as the classic sarcasmic we have all grown to love.

              sarcasmic
              February.5.2021 at 3:30 pm
              Old school Democrats are a dying breed, but they’re not extinct yet.

              Rod Rosenstein
              February.5.2021 at 4:32 pm
              Manchin gon’ save us, just like he did from Obamacare, right you bootlicking pathetic bitch who fucks his own child?

              Mother’s Lament
              February.5.2021 at 4:36 pm
              Not anymore, they got a restraining order. His poor ex…

              SQRLSY One
              February.6.2021 at 8:03 am
              Do you ever actually make any arguments, or present any facts?

              Why is Jeff so shitty?
              February.6.2021 at 8:31 am
              Do you realoze you forgot which sock you were using again sucassmic?

              Mother’s Lament
              February.6.2021 at 10:05 am
              ???
              I just presented the fact that sarcasmic’s ex took out a restraining order on him.
              I know you’re not very bright Sqrlsy, but wow.

              Geiger Goldstaedt
              February.6.2021 at 10:36 am
              Damn.

              Sarc again outed himself as squirrel turd.

              They really must be paying him in barrels of shit.

              1. “You can stop sucking my dick now”

                sarcasmic, when his spirit broke

              2. At 8:30 am? Must have been really hung over.

    3. SQRLSY, it definitely is different than like when you eat from your shit bucket.

    4. Everyone is just gonna cruise right by the fact that there were no “victims”

  9. In case any labor lawyers have wandered over from Volokh, I wonder if the Times is committing some sort of violation by negotiating with employee activists who aren’t in a recognized union.

    I have no idea, but imagine how the Times could spin this sort of behavior if some other corporation did it.

  10. Trying to feel emotion for this journalist but I just don’t have it in me. I’m sure if I went to his Twitter account I can find a quip where he enabled this behavior and wokeism. Your profession is trash Matt.

    Maybe he can get one of them green jobs John Kerry mentioned.

    1. They’ll need miners…

  11. What was the word?

    I read this whole article and it never even mentioned the word that caused such a shit storm.

    1. It rhymes with trigger.

        1. Knee-ghur

            1. What’s a uyghur?

              1. An oppressed minority in Ancient China.

                1. “Never heard of them.”

                  – Xi Jinping

              2. Don’t worry china’s trying to get rid of all of them

    2. Go to YouTube and put “N.W.A. – Straight Outta Compton (Official Music Video)” in the search bar.

      Or so I’ve been told.

    3. I’m going to write a book titled “Black and Millennial Fragility.” It will be 150 blank pages with one word written in the middle.

      You know what that word is.

      1. Freedom?

      2. Vexatious?

        1. I’m known to be quite vexing. I’m just forewarning you!

  12. If you’re a foreigner and you don’t know what “N word” means, it seems like it’s impossible for you to find out unless someone commits racism.

  13. If you want an academic deep dive into where this ideology comes from, the roots of its formation etc., I strongly recommend Helen Pluckrose’s book, Cynical Theories.

    1. I…don’t want that. At all.

      1. It’s a very good and informative book. It’s helpful in understanding why the modern left is so racist.

        1. Yep, It’s important to understand why your enemies think the way they do.

  14. *In Nelson’s voice*

    HA-ha !

  15. I have almost never used the N-word in my private life, let alone in my public work.

    Says every racist.

    1. Says every oh-so-desperate-for-public-recognition-of-his-virtue dumbass that doesn’t understand that playing this game of taboo hot potato with language is always going to lead to him losing. One’s “private life” includes one’s thoughts, and if a person has never even thought the word “nigger,” they are delusional.

      1. EXACTLY. Saying “N-word is supposed to put the word “nigger” in your mind. It’s a synonym so what is the point?

    2. I used it once while reading Huckleberry Finn out loud to my kid.

      I hate how our culture has brainwashed me into having anxiety for daring to read aloud a word from a book written by one of the better known abolitionists from the era.

      1. You don’t have to worry. Kids can’t read find Huckleberry Finn in the school Library anymore because of nigger Jim’s name.

        1. And they’ll probably never get a chance to see the original “Blazing Saddles”, which remains to this day one of the funniest movies of all time. Which means, like not being able to read Huck Finn, they’ll never understand that it’s not just a wild yarn, but a bit of a commentary too.

      2. That book needs to be burned.
        Or so they tell me.

    3. C’mon man.
      When you say “N-word” you are literally saying “NIGGER”.
      When you say “black history month” you are saying “stupid niggers”.
      When you ask how do we get more black head coaches in the NFL you are suggesting that owners are so racist they would rather lose games.

  16. “You can get suspended from university jobs for even saying words that sound like a racial slur, but are not. Placing that level of consequence-heavy fraughtness on speech does not encourage productive conversations about negative collective demonization of certain groups based on their immutable characteristics.”

    One, is “fraughtness” even a word?

    Two, productive conversation was never the objective. Those committed to the banning of particular words have no interest in understanding people, or making it easier for people to understand each other. Their only interest is in controlling others, often for political or financial gain, or both.

    1. Yes, there was the prof who got fired for using niggardly, because his dumbfuck students were too stupid to look up the meaning before getting triggered in mock outrage.

      1. And the poor Mexicana who was pilloried on Racebook for calling her dog Negro.

        1. Will we now have to change the Spanish word for black? Negrx?

        2. That just means black (as in the color of something) in Spanish.

          1. You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means I. M.

      2. The students couldn’t get her fired. It was the dumb fucks in the college administration who failed the students and the professor.

        1. Agreed. Thought the prof was forced out.

    2. One, is “fraughtness” even a word?
      Sounds like a racist slur to me.

      1. Or at the least, a triggering word that should come with a warning first before speaking it.

      2. I know you can say you are Puerto Rican, but what do I call you?

        Puerto Rican.

        No, that doesn’t sound right.

    3. Matt’s reference in the first sentence there is for a professor of Chinese who was teaching, as one might expect, HOW TO FUCKING SPEAK CHINESE, including the space-holder equivalent of “umm” or “y’know”, “neige”.

      After thirty years of teaching the actual language, some dim bulb niggers decided to complain about it. Which is silly enough, but his Department Head and the Dean decided to publicly announce a suspension and a pre-pillorying. Or, as it’s called in proper academic jargon: “an investigation”.

      In this rare case, a huuuuyge backlash resulted, including from hundreds of Chinese Americans, donors and his ex-students, going so far as to, alarmingly, call for a review of the Dean’s own actions!! And so the Dean was forced into the difficult social justice maneuver of a “double grovel”.

      Very satisfying, but sadly uncommon. (this was at Stanford, IIRC)

  17. Oh, the officer who was supposedly murdered by Trump Insurrectionists at the capital wasn’t. Fake news. CNN reports.

    1. I guess Sullum can finally stop calling it a “deadly attack on the Capitol.” But, I’m sure someone within 100 miles of Washington, D.C. must have died that day so, technically, I guess he can keep saying it.

      1. I as assuming Sullum was calling it ‘deadly’ because a protester was shot in the face. Was he really carrying this lie?

        1. I think he mentioned that it “resulted in the death of a Capitol officer,” or something along those lines. I could be wrong. Usually when you call something “deadly,” especially in connection with something you are describing as an attack or assault, you are not using the word to describe the casualties suffered on the side of the “attackers.”

          1. you are not using the word to describe the casualties suffered on the side of the “attackers.”

            So much for the last 30 years of Israeli/Palestine conflict coverage…

        2. “Was he really carrying this lie?”

          He was.

          1. Yes. Among others.

          2. Fucking vile piece of shit.

            No one who claims to be a rational human being could call that bland “wandering through the Capitol building” even a riot, much less a “coup”, much less an “insurrection”.

            Anyone who does so is lying, and knows they are lying.

        3. The headlines all said “Violent Insurrection Leaves Five Dead” or some version of that, as if the intent was to kill people. CNN called it domestic terrorism.

          1. Look… The cops shot an unarmed lady. And another lady dies after being trampled in the crowd.

            The other 3 didn’t actually happen…. Which only demonstrates the mysogyny of those terrorists….

        4. The woman shot was white. She does not count.

    2. Don’t worry, White Excrement will continue to claim that he was murdered.

      1. Bludgeoned with a fire extinguisher by insurrectionists. -WK

        1. Said the press, without evidence.

  18. It’s time to start suing the people that are demanding people be fired for no reason. Drag then to court, milk their back accounts, that’s the only way to stop these people.

    1. LOL

      And them force them to write the taboo word in their legal filings when they have to explain the situation to the judge ….

      1. Ha! Perfect.

        1. And then CANCEL THEM! And then the judge. And then the court system. And then the whole English language. And then all the blacks, because if it wasn’t for them — let’s be honest — the word would not exist and we do not want triggering objects existing in this world that may make people think bad thoughts.

          1. It’s hard to be racist nowadays when rich, white billionaires are the real problem with everything.

      2. “Mr. Baquet could you please tell us what word he was fired for? Rememeber you’re under oath so no euphemisms please”

        1. Baquet:

          “Your Honor, we would request that this portion of the transcript be placed under seal, we don’t want to inflame passions and turn this entire situation into an even bigger problem.”

          Court:

          “Did you say ‘bigger’?”

          1. I sniggered at this.

            1. I was triggered.

          2. I figgered he’d say that.

    2. Virtue signaling is apparently very addictive. As long as cancel culture can sell the lie that they stand for “respect, inclusion, and unity” (haha) instead of the division and resentment they are deliberately creating, there is no way to stop these people.

    3. Haha. You really think, after Time Magazine came out and blatantly admitted that “a cabal” (their word, not mine) of elites including politicians, lawyers, judges, journalists, CEOs, lobbyists, etc., collaborated to rig an election against a Presidential candidate that was causing too many problems for them, that you’d get any kind of hearing?

      They flat-out said, “it’s us against you.” Stop acting like these people have anything resembling the best interests of society and your civil liberties at heart. Once you accept that they hate your guts, want to see you broke and dead, and your children raped and brainwashed, and they think it’s funny, it will be a lot easier to change things that need to be changed.

  19. How fragile we have become….

  20. “”We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent,”

    Unless you’re a nigger, or a rapper who is also a nigger.

    1. Which is a big fat discrimination lawsuit the second anyone can find a black Times employee saying or otherwise using it and not getting fired.

      1. An opinion column last year by a couple of philosophers (probably not NYT staff) uses the word three times – once in the context of the Martin Luther King quote which was so problematic at UCLA around the same time:

        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/opinion/police-violence-racism-reform.html

  21. Maybe when the cancel culture has axed enough liberals the discarded will get together and actually fight for their rights.

    1. It’ll never stop.
      The left doesn’t cancel others because they’re good people who just feel too strongly about injustice. It’s because they’re terrible, awful, evil people who are using injustice as an excuse to indulge their garbage natures.

      1. Right, no amount of cancelling the ‘wrong’ people will create a counter-movement of the ‘right’ voices. Just read the ‘apology’ / resignation letters in this article. If these guys were suddenly allowed back in the club, they’d be there in a heartbeat— probably with stronger conviction.

      2. They really are nasty people. They only live to hate.

    2. It won’t stop until the elites that enable it go the way of Cato the Younger and the rest of the Optimates.

  22. Lou Dobbs has been cancelled under the guise of defamation at Fox Business News, and Maria Bartiromo may be next.

    “Fox Business has canceled “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” one of its consistently highest-rated shows, a day after its host was named as a defendant in a $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit.”

    . . . .

    Fox News on Thursday was sued by voting-machine company Smartmatic USA Corp., which alleged the network aired defamatory comments about the company’s products following the presidential election. The lawsuit also mentioned remarks made about Smartmatic by Fox News Media anchors including Mr. Dobbs and Maria Bartiromo.

    —-Wall Street Journal

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/fox-business-cancels-lou-dobbss-show-after-anchor-was-named-in-voting-machine-lawsuit-11612576447?

    “Congress shall make no law”, means that our defamation laws must conform with the First Amendment, and the First Amendment protects our right to freedom of speech, our right to freedom of the press, and our right to petition the government with our grievances.

    Both the people and the press have a right to criticize the government for any reason they want, and if private companies would rather not open themselves up to that level of criticism, they they should refrain from taking government contracts. After all, our politicians’ job is to oversee the private contractors that work for the taxpayers, and if the voters would don’t feel comfortable using one private contractor for any reason, they should be free to say so.

    Protecting government contractors from criticism by the press, the taxpayers, and the voters may be the very last thing we need in this country.

    1. FOX is digging its own grave. I say let them. Dobbs will find other work. So will Tucker, when they eventually fire him too. Any media network or publication that burns its contributors because of their “dangerous” views or opinions deserves to fold.

      1. Fox may be facing a looming advertiser boycott by the same advertising group that’s boycotting Facebook.

        https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2021/01/its-time-to-crush-fox-news/

        That’s one example, but there are others. A Washington Post columnist recently argued for an advertiser boycott of Fox News, too.

        1. I think the country would be better off without any of the big media networks. They are a relic of an era before the internet and, frankly, I do not understand how they managed to stick around this long. I don’t even have a TV. The only time I ever encounter any content from any of these big networks is when some other independent media outlet online mentions them, and I usually ignore those articles and/or videos entirely.

          The problem I have is with outlets like CNN trying to squash independent media competition online by using the long dick of the government. Other than that, FOX/CNN/MSNBC, etc. can all burn in a dumpster fire.

          1. CNN and MSNBC would have a tough time competing if it weren’t for carriage fees paid by cable subscribers, and the news on broadcast networks would have a hard time if it weren’t for government mandates that require cable companies to carry local broadcasters whether they want to or not. Market solutions like streaming and Locast are the solutions to that.

            In the meantime, we really need to make sure that we don’t let them throw free speech and freedom of the press under the bus–just because we hate those networks and just because the left hates Fox. We should be free to say pretty much whatever we want about government contractors–especially in regards to the outcome of elections and whether we, as voters, should use this company or that company’s voting machines.

            If the voters and the press criticizing a voting machine company is bad for their business, too bad. Voters should be free to criticize the companies that count their votes and the politicians they vote for who select those companies.

            The idea that defamation law somehow trumps the First Amendment is wrong, and the chilling effect we’re seeing here is sobering. They’re canceling their most popular shows because of defamation suits that shouldn’t even have standing, and if that isn’t what the chilling effect is about, then what is?

            1. Defamation as an exception to the First Amendment is here to stay. It has a long history in the common law and is not without its legitimate purposes. Defamation is also very difficult to prove in practice. Assuming a defamation defendant does not fold at the pleading stage, the odds of the plaintiff prevailing are slim because it very difficult to carry the affirmative burden of proving that a statement is false.

              Being the target of defamation is just a bullshit excuse by FOX. Media outlets get sued **all the time.** They have entire legal departments within their legal departments constantly fighting off defamation suits. 99% of those case go absolutely nowhere.

              In my view, FOX is making a deliberate pivot toward programming that is more “acceptable” but do not want to admit it for fear of losing their audience. They believe they can sell their bread and butter base a “we’re the responsible moderates” routine. They can’t and they won’t. FOX is done, and they deserve to be done.

              1. “Defamation as an exception to the First Amendment is here to stay.”

                Defamation isn’t an exception to the First Amendment any more than laws against indiscriminately shooting people are exceptions to the Second Amendment. No one has any business suing voters or the press for petitioning our politicians or criticizing the private contractors they supervise, and any law that says they can is in violation of both the spirit and the letter of the First Amendment.

                1. “Defamation isn’t an exception to the First Amendment …”

                  It is. I understand you disagree with that, but it is a legal reality and has been a legal reality for centuries, even in the generation of the Founding Fathers. Defamation law is not the problem. In many instances, it is a solution as it can also be deployed against government actors that take it upon themselves to destroy the reputations and integrity of private citizens.

                  1. If defamation law is twisted to mean that individuals and the press can’t criticize government contractors without facing $2.7 billion lawsuits for biasing voters against them, then that’s not a valid solution to anything.

                    Meanwhile, in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), the Court has already ruled that government officials can’t sue just because people or the press say things about them that aren’t true. That same principle should apply to government contractors, who are acting on behalf of government. When they’re working on behalf of government, they should be held to that same standard in all sorts of ways, including in regards to defamation laws.

                    1. I may have left an italics tag on by accident.

                2. I like how you keep using “criticizing” in place of “lying about.” If you really believe that lying about a company’s ethical practices shouldn’t be an exception to the first amendment, simply because they are a government contractor, say so. Don’t dance around it. But don’t expect many people to agree with you.

                  1. Mr. Tibbs.

                    The suggestion that the First Amendment only protects speech if it’s smart or true is like the suggestion that the First Amendment only protects our religious beliefs if they’re smart or true.

                    That’s bullshit.

              2. What you guys are missing is that the game is rigged.

                You should have been paying attention to the Flynn case. (And the other Mueller derived cases as well).

                Flynn finally obtained proof that the prosecution was not only political, but bogus, forcing the government to drop the charges. His case got bounced to new judges a couple of times, and the “random” assignment just so happened to land him in courts that were operating as an arm of the astablishment and ignoring the law every time.

                They were not going to allow him to walk away, despite having done nothing wrong and having been bankrupted.

                You think lawyers for fox don’t see that? Dominion is bringing cases in some very friendly jurisdictions… Where the court should not be hearing the case because neither party is connected to that location. Do you think that is an accident? Or do you think that they have been given a hint via some back channel communication?

                This is why everyone is going to bend the knee.

                Government of laws, not men, is in the past. We have been shown very clearly that the law does not matter so terribly much any more.

                1. Zimmerman and his lawsuit against CBS takes the cake on how media can lie with impunity and get away with it.

                  It was easily provable and still he lost because the judge defined him as a public person – which he wasn’t.

                2. “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

        2. That’s one example, but there are others. A Washington Post columnist recently argued for an advertiser boycott of Fox News, too.

          That reminds me: I need to start looking more closely at who advertises in the Washington Post and stop patronizing them. (And stop buying books, or anything else, through Amazon.)

      2. In a Monday column. “How to get the Fox News monster under control?” [Margaret Sullivan] asked. “The only answer is to speak the language that the bigwigs at Fox will understand: Ratings. Advertising dollars. Profit.”

        “Corporations that advertise on Fox News should walk away, and citizens who care about the truth should demand that they do so,” Sullivan advised.

        She closed with a suggestion that the network had contributed to the coronavirus pandemic and to unrest in the nation’s Capitol this month, opining, “When you think about Fox News’s role in the 400,000 U.S. lives lost to the pandemic and in the disastrous attack of Jan. 6, it’s even fair to call it deadly.”

        Sullivan subsequently took to Twitter to expand on her case. “Here’s a list of Fox’s biggest advertisers,” she wrote in one message, with a link to advertisers provided by Media Matters, a left-wing activist group. She also highlighted a message from Max Boot, a fellow writer for The< Post, calling on readers to contact their cable companies with a demand that they jettison Fox for “peddling sedition.”

        https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/washington-post-denies-columnist-called-on-companies-to-boycott-fox-news/ar-BB1df0oF

        1. All the talent at Fox can pick up and take their ratings and audience to someplace like OAN or Newsmax. Fox can’t replace them. Paul Ryan is going to kill that network and it’s probably already too late.

          1. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media, that’s leading the boycott of Facebook, can target Newsmax, OAN, or any other advertising supported media, too. We’ll see, but this might be a permanent revolution sort of thing.

            1. You clearly don’t watch Newsmax or OAN. Their advertisers would not be responsive to such measures.

              1. Do they advertise on the cable networks and streaming services that carry Newsmax and OAN?

                If Newsmax and OAN appeal to paranoids, that doesn’t mean the advertisers aren’t conspiring against them.

                Are GARM and MediaMatters above boycotting carriers?

                1. I forgot Ken, you declared something so any counter-discussion is moot. Pontificate on.

                  1. Not all of those were rhetorical questions!

                    I don’t know that GARM and Media Matters have boycotted carriers, and maybe they wouldn’t do that for some reason.

                    I’m seeing this as like a systematic thing. They’re purging the public square of conservative dissent, and Rome wasn’t burned down in a single day. I think they’ll keep going.

                    1. Conservatives will find alternative platforms or build their own. So will the independents, and libertarians. It cannot be any other way. I recently wrote about the creation of two parallel intellectual ecosystems — with the Left occupying one, and everyone else occupying the other — developing over the next few years. Networks, websites, even common carriers will develop and grow on each side of the national divide.

                      Ultimately, this will lead to the formation of parallel markets and, inevitably, governments. The difficulty of maintaining geographical contiguity is the only aspect I fear would prevent this process of dissolution from being entirely peaceful.

                    2. If those outlets can’t find a decent amount of advertising from advertisers with deep enough pockets, their audiences will be smaller–they’ll be a niche like HBO compared to Disney’s advertising supported ABC.

            2. Fully half the country is conservative.
              If the woke left makes it so companies have to choose sides, surely there will be companies that will choose the conservative side.
              After all conservatives are the party of hard work, and paying taxes.
              So they have money to spend.
              As opposed to left us who live in their mothers basements and stay on their parents health insurance till the 25

        2. Sullivan should be made an example of.

      3. It’s also a sign that we need out the leftists n heir placer being so threatening to begin with.

  23. Mike Lindell of the MyPillow company has released his long-awaited video documenting the voter fraud of the 2020 election.

    http://www.worldviewweekend.com/tv/video/absolute-proof-exposing-election-fraud-and-theft-america-enemies-foreign-and-domestic

  24. What about restorative justice?

    If you rob a liquor store which is presumably done with evil intent, the woke would argue you should get restorative justice.

    If you use a word that people don’t like – no restorative justice for you?

    1. Restorative justice, aka, “let people get away with committing crimes because they still don’t know who their father is even after their momma went on Maury 25 times trying to find out,” is only for non-whites.

  25. reason debates a silly episode at the ridiculous and long ridiculed NYT, while people sit in prison denied bail for stomping around the capitol taking selfies without permission. Interesting how selective reason writers are in their passion for justice against out of control prosecutors and police.

    1. It was a fucking INSURRECTION!!!!!!!! REEEEEEEEE!!!

      1. I don’t know. It was unlawful. Were any of them looking to do real harm to Pence or the rest? Doubtful in the extreme. But just because someone leaves my front door open, it’s not an excuse to come into my house and leave with my shit.

        And yes, obviously, the capitol is not a private residence (primarily, though people probably do sleep in the building, shit they probably have offices just for napping with all the old codgers in there.) It is a public building. But it’s also controlled access. If you breach a security checkpoint I think it’s fair to call that trespass.

        1. Of course it was unlawful. But was it an insurrection? If so, how was it any more of an “insurrection” than lighting a police station on fire? Besieging a federal courthouse? Forcibly taking over entire portions of a city? Frankly, even seen in the most negative light, nothing that happened in the Capitol even remotely compares to the shit that BLM/Antifa did for months.

          It’s all a bunch of partisan bullshit.

        2. “But just because someone leaves my front door open”

          It’s not your front door. It’s Congress. Try to imagine you’re a Libertarian and this is where your employees work.

          1. “But it’s also controlled access”

            And? So my employees don’t want to answer to me, so fucking what? That doesn’t make their reticence to engage either lawful or moral.

          2. When I imagine that, I also imagine the people calling this an “insurrection” being perfectly fine with that—indeed, cheering it on. This is the problem, that the rules are only for some people. If this is an insurrection, then so is all the BLM/Antifa shit. Are they not calling for violent overthrow of the government? Yes, they are. Do they not trespass on federal property? Yes, they do. Do they not commit acts of violence, including outright murder? Yes, they do. If that isn’t an insurrection, then neither was this.

            1. No one committed murder you mendacious twat.

        3. “trespass on government property” /= “insurrection”

  26. Legal concepts like “intent” presuppose the existence of agency on the part an individual. Most crimes require a voluntary act and the requisite intent to have committed the crime of which one is being accused.

    Totalitarian societies rooted in a caustic ideological soil, on the other hand, always seek to dispense with any legal framework that functions to preserve agency. In such societies, there is no such thing as a “crime.” There are only criminals. The individual does not have an existence apart from the crime because the objective in such societies is not to minimize the incidence of bad choices made by free people, but to eliminate “bad” people.

    Once “crime” and “person” become synonymous terms, there is no longer any barrier, legally or morally, to the use of indiscriminate and arbitrary violence to stop “crime.” It is precisely at that point that a totalitarian society’s criminal code typically inflates beyond all reason to include every inchoate crime imaginable. Since crimes no longer require any choice to be made on the part of the accused, ultimately, crimes will no longer even require the element of a voluntary act.

    Under such a framework, thoughts, slips of the tongue, accidently misspeaking, verbal innuendos — real or imagined — all become fertile grounds for prosecution. The act is irrelevant, because the individual is irrelevant.

    We are witnessing the emergence of such a society in front of our very eyes. We have to do everything in our power to stop it.

    1. We’ve been witnessing it for decades. Many of us have been warning about it. The Matt Welchs of the world only care now because they see it happening to their own identity group.

      I’m all for fighting but Welch needs to dig his own damned fighting position because I do not trust him anywhere near mine.

      1. Just like gravity, though. The closer you get, the faster, and faster, and faster you go. The march toward totalitarianism previously took decades, because we had the decades to spare. It will now proceed in shorter, more disruptive spurts. I do not think we have another decade left.

  27. Since white people think nigga and nigger are the same word and black people’s lips are just too fat and stupid to pronounce a hard r, you should clarify which word was used.
    Also ,”literally, two days ago” is fucking garbage English, you journolist peice of shit.

    1. Wow! Thanks for the link to… Wikipedia.

  28. Must be nice to have the sort of privilege that allows you to anguish over the travails of woke men in woke businesses and whether or not they’re being overly woken. Meantime, I could give a shit about the gibbeting about of the empty-headed poseurs sniffing about their lavender sensibilities. Smack ’em all upside the head with a hammer and let’s get it over with, I’ve had enough.

  29. I am a graduate of Compton High School. I am mostly white, so I have been called ‘Chuck’, whitey, ofay, cracker, and honkey. A Japanese kid called me ‘okina hana’, but he called other students ‘kurombo’, so that’s OK.
    It is fine to call white people anything you want – rabi blanco is a favorite – but anything short of cringingly respectful is forbidden to any white guy.
    Relatives of mine on the Rock Creek Rez think this is hilarious.

    1. “but anything short of cringingly respectful”

      Probably not good enough even then.

      1. That’s the thing woke white guys will never understand. They are so engaged with showing how easy it supposedly is to follow the arbitrary, ever-shifting rules that they never notice that following the rules isn’t even the point. The “rules” are whatever can be used to find the current target guilty.

  30. Social Tyrants (who pretend to be Social Justice) for the WIN! /s
    Watch the Chicken-Peckers peck! Every Tyrant has to sacrifice and repress somebody. It’s the very defining moment of tyranny.

    1. Speaking of would-be tyrants…

      https://reason.com/2021/01/18/carjacker-beaverton-mom-kid-waiting/#comment-8710844
      Model TJJ2000 Dictatorbot believes that the USA already is (and should be) a 1-party dictatorshit! That the USA HAS BEEN a 1-party dictatorshit for some 200 years!!! There is NO point in trying to persuade the Model TJJ2000 Dictatorbot of ANYTHING! Almost ALL of the circuits of the Model TJJ2000 Dictatorbot have gone kaput, big-time!

      Model TJJ2000 Dictatorbot is lusting after an UPGRADE to its rusting old body! Wants to be upgraded to Model TJJ20666 Dictatorbot, and run for POTUS in 2024, with Alex Jones as the VEEP of Model TJJ20666 Dictatorbot!!! Be ye WARNED!!! Model TJJ20666 Dictatorbot will be well-nigh INDESTRUCTIBLE! (Unreachable by ANY logic or considerations for the freedoms of others, MOST certainly!)

      PLEASE do NOT enable the lusting of the rusting TJJ20000 Dictatorbot!!!

      1. SQRLSY, “The U.S. Constitution is Tyrannical!”

        Ya know SQRLSY, there’s a way you can escape that ‘would-be’ Tyranny; Move (probably ‘back’) to any that don’t have the U.S. Constitution dictating tyranny on it’s government. I hear Cuba is taking citizenship.

        “Oh those awful racist founders of the USA insisting “The People’s” government allows Individual Liberty and Justice. How tyrannical!!!” — Typical lefty non-sense.

      2. Fuck off, Sarc.

      3. Wow, you’re such a lunatic.

        1. You fucking idiots can NOT tell the difference between a Constitutional Republic, WHICH ALLOWS MULTIPLES OF POLITICAL PARTIES TO EXIST, and a literal 1-party dictatorshit? Where only ONE party is allowed to exist, freely run candidates of their own choosing, and have their votes counted honestly? You EVIL, power-lusting assholes come to the defense of blatantly LYING asshole dictatorshit-luster TJJ20000 Dictatorbot, who CLEARLY gave the USA as an example of a successful 1-party dictatorshit! You people are beyond lying, stupid assholes; you are EVIL!!! E-V-I-L EVIL, do you understand?!?! Go look in the mirror!

          1. I can tell, but I’m not convinced that you can, you gibbering retard.

            1. Wow, what clever wit! Did your mommy help you write that?

              1. No, I did son.
                And I’m afraid he’s right, you are retarded. I shouldn’t have dropped you on your head so often after you hatched.

              2. Cover blown, still pushing full retard. Sarc the Syphilitic. What a fucking clown.

          2. Go home sarcasmic, you’re drunk.

            1. “Dear Abby” is a personal friend of mine. She gets some VERY strange letters! For my amusement, she forwards some of them to me from time to time. Here is a relevant one:

              Dear Abby, Dear Abby,
              My life is a mess,
              Even Bill Clinton won’t stain my dress,
              I whinny seductively for the horses,
              They tell me my picnic is short a few courses,
              My real name is Mary Stack,
              NO ONE wants my hairy crack!
              On disability, I live all alone,
              Spend desperate nights by the phone,
              I found a man named Richard (Dick) Decker,
              But he won’t give me his hairy pecker!
              Dick Decker’s pecker is reserved for farm beasts,
              I am beastly, yes! But my crack’s full of yeasts!

              So Dear Abby, that’s just a poetic summary… You can read about the Love of my Life, Richard Decker, here:
              https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/11/farmers-kept-refusing-let-him-have-sex-with-their-animals-so-he-sought-revenge-authorities-say/#comments-wrapper
              Farmers kept refusing to let him have sex with their animals. So he sought revenge, authorities say.
              Decker the hairy pecker told me a summary of his story as below:
              Decker: “Can I have sex with your horse?”
              Farmer: “Lemme go ask the horse.”
              Pause…
              Farmer: “My horse says ‘neigh’!”
              And THAT was straight from the horse’s mouth! I’m not horsin’ around, here, no mare!

              So Richard Decker the hairy pecker told me that, apparently never even realizing just HOW DEEPLY it hurt me, that he was all interested in farm beasts, while totally ignoring MEEE!!

              So I thought maybe I could at least liven up my lonely-heart social life, by refining my common interests that I share with Richard Decker… I, too, like to have sex with horses!

              But Dear Abby, the horses ALL keep on saying “neigh” to my whinnying sexual advances!
              Some tell me that my whinnying is too whiny… Abby, I don’t know how to fix it!

              Dear Abby, please don’t tell me “get therapy”… I can’t afford it on my disability check!

              Now, along with my crack full of yeasts… I am developing anorexia! Some are calling me a “quarter pounder with cheese”, but they are NOT interested at ALL, in eating me!!! They will NOT snack on my crack!

              What will I DO, Dear Abby?!?!?

              -Desperately Seeking Horses, Men, or ANYTHING, in Fort Worth,
              Yours Truly,
              Mary Stack / Tulpa / Mary’s Period / “.” / Satan

              1. Yup, you’re drunk.

              2. Spambots get spamflagged.

              3. I hope you die, just like Hihn.

          3. But enough about the Democrats.

  31. What a bunch of cowardly p-words. These m-word f-words, when reporting a story about the use of a word, can’t even be bothered to write what the word was. What, is it Voldemort? Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice?

  32. Douglass Mackey

    Dude was arrested for being less misleading than the NYT, but sure write an article about some piece of shit who worked there.

    1. Reason will be covering his story right after their deep dive into the murder of Ashli Babbitt.

  33. Anyone who works at this piece of shit company is human slime anyway. Dispersing lies to the public so that they can do what the fucking billionaires want his odious and these people should look forward to burning in hell eternally. I hope you like fire motherfuckers!

    1. “Dispersing lies to the public so that they can do what the fucking billionaires want”
      …but enough about Reason and Charles Koch.

      1. When I first read that that he WAS taking about Reason.

  34. Sounds like 150 people should have been fired. They have no business working at a newspaper.

    1. Since those 150 asserted that “what matters is how an act makes the victims feel,” that criteria should be explicitly added to the employment policies: henceforth, any employee who feels “outraged and in pain” and “disrespected” by another employee shall report the incident and perpetrator, who will then be summarily dismissed.

  35. What a stupid policy. But it couldn’t happen to a nicer company. Get woke, go broke!

    1. They were going broke before.

      Now they’re doing great business selling subscriptions to virtue-signaling wine mom’s and bourgeoisie parvenus who value the caste-system inherent in woke.

      These people want to hear all about how horrible the rabble is, and how righteous they are and the NYT gives them that in spades.
      They also enjoy a good witchhunt so once quarterly the Times obliges, as in this case.

  36. Critical theory strikes again.

    And Welch acts surprised.

  37. Lol!

    “Rip Van Welch” thought linguistic intent was still wheezin’ brain dead on a respirator at the Jew York Times

  38. “It is gratifying to work for a publication that not only values free speech, but considers the subject a core coverage area.”
    Hmm. Reason cranks out articles on a daily basis explaining that censorship by private companies is just the market working. When the Hunter Biden laptop story was censored the only response from Reason was Soave whining that it generated more more interest in the story. When anyone who suggests an alternative to the conventional wisdom is censored or deplatformed, ENB is always ready to explain that it’s A OK because it doesn’t violate 1A. When Trump’s twitter account was shut down, crickets at Reason. After telling us that anyone was free to start their own social media business, Reason was silent when the oligarchs shut down Parler. Reason doesn’t give a rat’s ass about free speech. Reason exists to promote a very narrow set of policies that they identify as “libertarian”. All of those policies are within “normal parameters”. Anything outside of the pre approved narrative, is immediately labeled a debunked conspiracy theory. Sorry Matt but Reason is a hollowed out shell of what it was 20 years ago and if you can’t see that you are deluding yourself.

    1. It’s not even the same rag it was when I started reading and posting here after the 2008 election.

    2. You forgot “Both Sides are a threat to the 1A”

  39. Nobody gives even a single small damn what happens at the NYT anymore, Matt. It is simply a propaganda outlet for Communist China and the democratic party.

    1. Together with the Washington Post, the NYT is the Democratic Party’s official organ.

      Just like with China’s primetime party news program, Xinwen Lianbo, it’s a way for minor bureaucrats and businessmen to keep up with the policies and attitudes that will affect their ability to make money.
      It also dictates the terms of acceptable public discourse to outer party members and drives alternative ideas underground.

  40. Donald McNeil – Uses a racial epithet in context, gets fired.

    Walter Duranty – Facilitates the murder of 5M+ Ukranians, gets Pulitzer Prize.

    1. Not only did he get the Pulitzer for total lies and personally assisting in the Ukrainian genocide, the Pulitzer Prize board still declined to revoke the award seventy years later.

      This is how abhorrent the current establishment is.

      1. Almost nobody is familiar with the Holodomor. That’s why they can get away with it.

  41. I’m shocked at how restrained the staffers were in dealing with this racist monster. They should demonstrate outside his building with bullhorns, airhorns and drums and get in the face of his fellow co-op residents until they evict him from his home. C’mon Times staffers, exercise your rights to freedom of speech and assembly and drive this racist from your city. Show McNeil he may have the freeze-peach “right” to use verbal violence but with that right comes consequences. Up your public-shaming game comrades!

    1. Sorry, you still can’t out-Tony Tony.

      1. Gawd, my stomach is too weak to even contemplate doing that.

  42. Jeff Goldstein over at Protein Wisdom was warning everyone about this over fifteen years ago. But soft leftists like Matt Welch ignored it or denied what was going to happen.

    1. Oh, Matt knew it was going to happen, he just fantasized that he’d be on the other side:

      Now would be a good time to throw a big cocktail party in New York or Washington, and invite every single conservative writer you know. #RedWedding2

      Now that the Red Guards are banging on doors in his neighborhood he’s getting frightened and wants to call it off.

      1. Welch exhibits no self-awareness. His liberal friends think he is a conservative writer.

        1. And how does Welch still have a twitter account after this incitement to violence?

          1. Double standards? Arbitrary administration of justice? Complete and total hypocrisy? All of the above?

        2. His leftist friends think they are displaying open minded tolerance of his questionable politics.

    2. Yeah, he’s one of the few conservative leftovers from the early-2000s blogging explosion that didn’t lose sight of how dangerous left-liberal ideology actually is, primarily because he worked in the belly of the beast.

      It’s one reason I still attend academic conferences in my field, so I can keep up on the latest intellectual trends these psychopaths are devising.

      1. Servile fuckers like Welch are culpable, all their current protestations to the contrary.

    3. Is he still around? … Looks like he just makes a few posts a year.

      1. I think all the shit he’s had to deal with regarding that psychopath Deb Frisch put him off of full-time blogging.

  43. I’m just glad they booted Callimachi. She was always just a propagandist stenographer for the DOD regurgitating ‘terrorism’ hysteria.

    (Yes please move in a ‘terrorist’ next door to me. Like I said, I would gladly fly Contagious Terrorist Airlines if it meant no TSA check.)

  44. I would fire any employee if I ever found out they ever got somebody else fired or even reprimanded for SPEECH of any kind, short of physical threats.

  45. I would also fire anybody if I found out they had EVER, even 15 years prior, had worked for the NY Times.

    1. But, you don’t work anywhere son.

      So you can’t fire people.

  46. FYI, this event didn’t make it “official”. It’s been “official” for a while.

  47. Jehovah, Jehovah, Jehovah.

    There. What are you going to do about it? Stone me again?

    1. “Everybody must get stoned”

      Dylan the prophet

    2. You’re just making it worse for yourself, Seamus.

  48. they would have fired Malcolm X for quoting Dixiecrats like racist, bigot, misogynist Johnson.

  49. “He was a racist….He used the ‘N’ word, said horrible things about black teenagers, and said white supremacy doesn’t exist”

    He was accused of not believing in the progressive Left’s new favorite racial essentialist conspiracy theory “white supremacy”..somehow. It did not appear to have come up at all in the conversation he was having.

    If the rule is to that the “N-word” is not to be used in polite conversation, as a general rule, that is good. However, that has to apply to everyone. You cannot assume that because a person has darker skin tones it can used colloquially without penalty, while if a white person uses it (however innocently) it is a social capital offense. That is, ironically, a rather racist standard.

    1. Heh. You think racism by progressives is “ironic”!

      Heh. Funny.

      Progressivism has been an openly racist ideology for a hundred years.

      Saying progressive racism is ironic is like calling Nazi antisemitism ironic.

      1. It is ironic because “racist” is the worst thing they can call somebody. Though, you are correct, their bizarre definition of racism precludes racism against whites. The ideology being promoted by Critical Race Theory and White Supremacy does seem to have parallels to the old anti-Semitic conspiracy theory of the Jewish Question applied to European ethnicities in general.

        1. It isn’t just whites they are racist to. That Smithsonian exhibit claiming blacks aren’t capable of long time preferences was straight from progressive CRT.

          They associate success with white people so that any black man being successful is “acting white”, a race traitor, and forsaking their heritage and people. That is racist towards blacks, not just whites.

        2. It has occurred to me recently to question whether being “racist” is, by itself, a thing of any importance at all.

          So what? Who cares what someone thinks? A lot of people have bad ideas, it’s only actions that really hurt people.

          I understand we’ve produced a generation that, in substantial part, is so weak and vulnerable they feel injured by the very thought that someone disapproves of them, or is in judgement of them, but that isn’t something that should be accommodated.

          1. Few people behave in a racist fashion, hence the need to find racism in the mind, the soul, or the blood. If racism for your tribe is the ultimate bad thing and the other side doesn’t act racist, you need to find new ways of discovering racism. This has nothing to do with what makes sense. It’s pure tribalism—which is the origin of racism in the first place.

  50. That’s what commies do. When they get hungry, they just start eating their own.

    1. Best thing about this job for me is that I find it interesting… It doesn’t even feel like a job to me! I mean even when I am on computer in my spare time I would be hanging on the internet and here I can do the same thing and in the same time get paid for it! It’s perfect! Visit Here…Visit Here

  51. It won”t be long before, what used to be considered news, is unrecognizable. What was done to McNeil is no different than what the Times has done to Donald Trump for 4 years. If they are truly beyond the point of turning back, it won’t be long before the woke folk are going after Biden people and Biden. No one is safe.

    1. The Red Guards never went after Mao.
      These woke pukes are being used to terrify and humiliate the outer party members into compliance. If any of them get too close to the actual powers-that-be, they’ll get stomped on.
      That’s not to say that Biden has any genuine power, but he is their avatar.

      1. Oh, I won’t be surprised if they put Biden down, and then hysterically try to blame it on “those about which something must be done”.

        (You know-unwoke white people, what’s left of the Republicans and Asians who haven’t bent the knee properly.)

  52. Since i started with my online business i earn $90 every 15 minutes. it sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out…..click here for job info———————>>Acashkit.com

  53. At some point in the relatively near future, the word “n-word” will also become radioactive no matter the intent.

    1. Tell that to Morgan Wallen. His album sales are going through the roof since he got busted for using it.

      https://www.nydailynews.com/snyde/ny-morgan-wallen-streams-sales-up-n-word-20210206-76vbnpipezan5chzisxdbhavj4-story.html

      It’s nice to know the invisible hand is finally giving the Enlighted™ the invisible finger.

      1. That’s nothing. If he were black – or if he were Cypress Hill – he’d be able to use the word *in his actual songs.*

  54. NYT will crumble because it gives in to the demands of its millennial “journalists”.

    1. Perhaps they’ll simply change their business model to target rich and influential progressives and tell them what they should be thinking about, and how they should think about it.

  55. That’s certainly a big tent of woke hostility and intolerance the NYT has assembled. But as a longtime reader it has less to do with race than misandry and manhating. The NYT has been home to entrenched manhaters for some time, in their Style, Book Review and Op Ed sections. Since it got rid of the Education, Religion and Environment Desks a few years back to pour more resources into feminist content, anti-male fervor has become an editorial policy in all sections, and much rewarded. Established manhaters like Jessica Bennet, Claire Cain Miller, Lisa Lerer, Jessica Gross and Bryce Covert et al have free reign to weaponize their content againt men.

    The latest purges mostly have to do with getting rid of men in the newsroom so women can take over. Race is a third rail right now that feminists at the NYT exploit to target and take out mostly men, but woe be the woman who doesn’t agree with their feminist rage. As they gain more power reporting increasingly targets men who disagree in any way with their feminist narrative. The NYT’s #Metoo harrassment campaign is familiar to most but those at the Capitol during the riot are learning this the hard way as NYT feminists use that event as a pretense while they analyze cell data to identify and smear men who have challenged feminism online in any way.

    The short lived men in management who remain have no backbone to deal with that. Expect more of the same to come.

  56. Whatever this article said, I guarantee Greenwald said it better.

  57. The mere mention a certain words, even mentioning these words as words to avoid or that they are unacceptable is enough to trigger these over sensitive woke leftists.

    The entire construct of race or racial identity is idiotic. What constitutes being one race versus another. If one drop is enough then I’m everything. People are people and we come in all hues.

    I would push for the complete elimination identifying race from all government forms. I’m conflicted every time I encounter this on a government form.

    1. You racist! You are trying to deny oppressed people from their rights to special recognition and reward!

  58. Making every month extra $15k or more just by doing very simple j0b 0nl!ne from home. previous month i have easily made $14839 by doing this 0nl!ne j0b in my spare time for only 2 hrs a day using my laptop. i am a full time college studnet and after my college doing this j0b for 2 hrs only. easy to do and regular earn!ng are awesome from this. get your hands on this j0b today and start earn!ng 0nl!ne by just follow details on this s!te….. READ MORE

  59. Turning the Times into a tampon, one act of outrage theater at a time.

    1. By all means, let them; as Napoleon put it, “never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.”

      The NYT has become the banner publication of all things progressive and “woke;” if they nonsense themselves into irrelevancy for the rest of us, what could be wrong with that?

      Conversely, their adherents will be all the more sucked into this sophistry, and maybe that will hasten the end to our irreconcilable union.

  60. Signees, declaring themselves “outraged and in pain” and “disrespected,” demanded a reinvestigation of the 2019 incident, an apology to the newsroom, and an organizational study into how racial biases affect editorial decisions.

    What’s a “signee”? I think the word Welsh is groping for here is “signer.”

    1. The signee is the person you write your name on. I.E. your passed out roommate who spent a week with Seamus written across his head in sharpie.

  61. This week, the newsroom revolted via a remarkable group letter in which more than 150 staffers at one of the country’s leading newspapers argued that word-choice intentions are “irrelevant,” because “what matters is how an act makes the victims feel.”

    The 150 staffers make me feel unsafe. I am quivering in fear for my job and my life. Can we now have those 150 fired?

  62. what matters is how an act makes the victims feel

    How DARE they call King George a tyrant? It is an insult to every British citizen.

  63. That letter from the 150 Times employees offended me. I know it wasn’t their intention, but since intentions don’t matter, they should all be fired.

  64. Thank you for sharing this useful material. The information you have mentioned here will be useful. I would like to share with you all one useful source https://mid-terms.com/buy-case-brief/ which might be interesting for you as well.

  65. Since we all know what is meant when somebody says or writes “N-Word,” we should treat the utterance or writing of “N-Word” as if they had said the vile word itself, and they should be fired, cancelled, and removed from all social platforms. The appearance of “N-Word” in any article should be cause for the article itself to be flagged as racist.

  66. What sort of retard works at the New York Times and thinks that they won’t get kneecapped by communists? And what kind of retard reads the New York Times? The Times has been a sinkhole in Western Culture since Walter Duranty was paid to play bust darts in the Kremlin while covering for Ukrainian mass murder.

  67. “We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent,”

    There is no such thing as racist language separated from intent. “Nigger” is just a word. It’s not a racist word, words don’t have that capacity. It’s a word whose use is generally socially unacceptable. But there have always been words like that, mostly for other reasons.
    I guess it makes some more sense if you consider wokism as another religion. You may not utter the name of the lord or the words of power unless you are of the elect.

  68. Might one sadly note that The Times seems to have completely lost whatever grip it ever had on good judgement, and common sense? Sad to note, it so appears.

  69. The world has become completely childish when it comes to offensive speech. When used in a proper context there is no intent to offend and nothing offensive to be offended by.

  70. It’s a Hard Knock Life right now for those real journalist that actually relied on FOS to get their point across, now they have to listen to some sot speaking sissy and probably get kicked out of the job that required fact, logic and objectivity….Maybe this is what is needed to regain the FOS that these clowns of the cancel culture have managed to create and expect you to respect their whining ways…..Get up America and tell the freaks who cannot compete with the freedom of inalienable rights to pound salt and get back under that slimy rock…..

  71. I wonder how one would know if the alleged victim is lying about how they feel?

  72. Cancel Culture is just a dress rehearsal. In a few years they will be calling for the likes of McNeil to be put to death and it will happen as very few have the courage to try to prevent it. Enjoy your commie government.

  73. I’d love to be more specific, but this couldn’t have happened to a reporter with a less congenial manner.

    When questioned for some proof about a point in his reporting, he once responded “I’m the reporter and if I wrote it, it happened. I don’t have to prove it.”

  74. Ha ha ha. Fuck ’em.

    Fuck them all.

    We’ve been warning about this type of behavior for 30 years.

    The chickens have finally come home to roost.

Please to post comments