Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Whatever. I posted the link because I think it was a good analysis of the problems that Bennet had in trying to run the NYT op-ed page in the age of Trump. If the only thing you got out of it was that Heer thinks Cotton's piece was bad, you missed the good stuff.
You're not articulating a good reason why the NYT should give space to Cotton to tells lies about antifa and call for a military crackdown on peaceful protest -- you just want to complain about the people who objected to it.
If I were running the Times op-ed page, I would stick to running well-written, interesting ideas, and I wouldn't try to troll my readers. Bennet is gone because he trolled too hard.
|
Who decides what is interesting and what is not? We agree Cotton is not interesting, but much of what you’d argue is interesting or well written I would think garbage, and vice versa. Who gets to play ultimate decider here?
I’m not unsympathetic to putting an exalted expert’s finger on the scale. I just don’t see many of them out there. Most of the progressive thinkers I read strike me as at best middle minded. Most of the conservatives strike me as deluded or apologists. Both traffic in voluntary and involuntary sophistry as Pablo Escobar did cocaine.
There are no Vidal v. Buckley match ups out there. Nor are there any truly centrist voices who’ll demand compromise and balance because in the media, compromise doesn’t sell.
Neither Heer nor you nor I have any expertise to suggest what should be filtered from Oped pages.
