Roseanne fired but Sarah Jeong hired?

splashuum

I find it incredible that main stream media can pick and choose who and what they define as racist.
Sarah Jeong has just been hired by the New York Times despite her clear hatred against white people. What is even more astounding is that the NYT have doubled down on Jeong after seeing her tweets. They have now publicly declared a vote of confidence in her.

hatrickpatrick

Was planning on making a thread about this. The double standard is incredible - and this, by the way, is exactly what I'm always talking about when I reference "SJWs". Double standards around hate speech make me f*cking sick. :mad:

TheValeyard

She has a problem with Battlestar Galactica!!!!







What a cow.

backspin.

It's a real bad move by the NYT. I think they have misjudged this one. What are their white customers to think when they see this. This woman is obviously a serious racist. How can they berate anyone in future over racism when they stand by someone like Jeong.

I would have no faith in the New York Times after this.

hatrickpatrick

The fact that the mainstream, "polite" media will support double standards like this is what gives rise to the idea that men and white people are considered fair game for hate speech. It's utterly despicable and I can't imagine the amount of harm this kind of ideology does to young boys and white people when they stumble across it online - "why is it ok for them to joke about killing me, but not for me to joke about killing them?" - imagine being seven or eight years old and being faced with officially sanctioned hate speech against your demographic.

It's beyond repulsive. In my view, this is one thing the internet shouldn't let go of - the heat and pressure should be kept up on the NYT until they at least condemn what she said. Personally I don't agree with firing people for their political ideology, but they shouldn't be defending it either. They should be saying "she's a good editor, but we condemn unequivocally her unacceptable, hateful and violent rhetoric against innocent people".

Twenty Grand

Maybe she should be a little bit more grateful after the white people liberated Korea from Japan after WW2 and fought the North Koreans in the 50s.

Harleen Quinzel

If I tweeted #CancelAsianPeople, would it trend, or would it get rightfully lambasted?

Maybe I should try it and then submit my cv to the New York Times.

Ulysses Gaze

Well according to Vox, the tweets are 6 years old, she was just being sarcastic in her tweets using the language of the alt-right against them and she is a celebrated feminist tech journalist so this is all a storm in a teacup.

The fact that she writes a column in Voxs sister site has no bearing on their defence of her.

At all......

NickNickleby

backspin. wrote: »

It's a real bad move by the NYT. I think they have misjudged this one. What are their white customers to think when they see this. This woman is obviously a serious racist. How can they berate anyone in future over racism when they stand by someone like Jeong.

I would have no faith in the New York Times after this.

To be honest, I've no doubt that some or many of their "right on", white, middle class readers will have no problem with it. In fact I'm surprised not to have already seen a post in the thread along the lines of: "what's the problem?" or " She was being ironic" or " Roseanne REALLY meant it". As if she (Jeong) wasn't actually referring to them at all.

That image of her tweets was actually astonishing. Juvenile (the tweets).

Sand

The real hypocrisy is that just 6 months ago, the New York Times fired Quinn Norton only hours after announcing her hire.

It emerged that Norton had re-tweeted a comment made by another who was making a point about racism. The comment she retweeted contained a racial slur that comprises roughly 20% of rap lyrics. She had her excuses too but the NYT operated a no-tolerance policy in her case, whilst very much tolerating the toxic racism of Sarah Jeong. The NYT is a sick institution.

Ulysses Gaze

Sand wrote: »

The real hypocrisy is that just 6 months ago, the New York Times fired Quinn Norton only hours after announcing her hire.

It emerged that Norton had re-tweeted a comment made by another who was making a point about racism. The comment she retweeted contained a racial slur that comprises roughly 20% of rap lyrics. She had her excuses too but the NYT operated a no-tolerance policy in her case, whilst very much tolerating the toxic racism of Sarah Jeong. The NYT is a sick institution.

It's this type of thing that will lead Trump back into the White House in 2020

Westernyelp

Twenty Grand wrote:

Maybe she should be a little bit more grateful after the white people liberated Korea from Japan after WW2 and fought the North Koreans in the 50s.

Jaysus. It's comments like that that make me see where she's coming from

fly_agaric

I think the yanks call those type of comments "punching up" in the batshít political/culture war they have going on over there.
Nasty + childish tweets are really profound political statements about the nature of race and power in the contemporary Unites States.:pac:

The youth seem to enjoy a good social media witchhunt & shaming so perhaps that's something everyone can agree on!

Franz Von Peppercorn

backspin. wrote: »

It's a real bad move by the NYT. I think they have misjudged this one. What are their white customers to think when they see this. This woman is obviously a serious racist. How can they berate anyone in future over racism when they stand by someone like Jeong.

I would have no faith in the New York Times after this.

She was hired because of her tweets, not in spite of them. If they manage to ride out this storm they get more hits. It’s the problem with the internet age.

SEPT 23 1989

seems like a delightful woman

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Sal Butamol

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Well according to Vox, the tweets are 6 years old, she was just being sarcastic in her tweets using the language of the alt-right against them and she is a celebrated feminist tech journalist so this is all a storm in a teacup.

The fact that she writes a column in Voxs sister site has no bearing on their defence of her.

At all......

The term alt-right only came into vogue around 2016.

Also she has other tweets about killing all men and cops.

She's an absolute scumbag and the New York Times are the ultimate hypocrites

Sand

It seems the BBC is also endorsing Sarah Jeong's racism. They first reported the "The New York Times has defended a new member of its editorial board who wrote racist tweets about white people."

On August 3rd the story was stealth edited to read "The New York Times has defended a new member of its editorial board who wrote inflammatory tweets about white people." They also changed the headline to put racist tweets into quotation marks.

This is on the basis of accepting Jeongs justification for her racism:

"Update 3 August 2018: This article and its headline were updated after reflecting on Sarah Jeong's statement explaining her actions."

So on reflection the BBC accept racism is not racism where they agree with it.

soiseztomabel

Woah woah woah.... Hasn't Twitter, Facebook, Huffpost, buzzfeed and any other source informed us that you CANT be racist towards crackers. Us honkey's were responsible for slavery irregardless of whether the vast majority ever owning one..

Sal Butamol

The New York Times has been a joke for a while now. Their coverage of Trump has been beyond embarrassing.

c.p.w.g.w

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Well according to Vox, the tweets are 6 years old, she was just being sarcastic in her tweets using the language of the alt-right against them and she is a celebrated feminist tech journalist so this is all a storm in a teacup.

The fact that she writes a column in Voxs sister site has no bearing on their defence of her.

At all......

Sure the same could be said about James Gunner(guardian of galaxy fame) but sure his white and out of a job

eyerer

Even 20 years ago you could see the idea that only men can be sexist and only whites can be racist. Unsurprisingly it has only gotten worse and will continue to do so.

We'll end up need a masculinist movement and white affirmative action. The double standard discrimination is a joke.

Maybe most of the 1% are still white men, but guess what.. I and the vast majority are ordinary Joes not the 1%.

Franz Von Peppercorn

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Woah woah woah.... Hasn't Twitter, Facebook, Huffpost, buzzfeed and any other source informed us that you CANT be racist towards crackers. Us honkey's were responsible for slavery irregardless of whether the vast majority ever owning one..

We’re guilty even if in a different country with no tradition of slavery. Well except for us.

suicide_circus

racism is just an extension of human tribalism, it's not a helpful trait in our current society but we shouldn't beat ourselves up about it as much as we do.

Ulysses Gaze

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

We’re guilty even if in a different country with no tradition of slavery. Well except for us.

Listen, I've argued that the Irish were enslaved for 800 years under the yoke of colonialism.

It'll get you nowhere.

Apparently, we were not enslaved as badly.

The fact that a million Irish died during the famine is not of enough consequence.

Phoebas

Is this going to be a thread where lots of people who have never even heard of Sarah Jeong before are going be outraged because she got a job in a paper they don't read?

srsly lads

why do ye care so much about this

you are more likely to be affected by potato blight than this nonsense

a sense of proportionality would be a wonderful addition at either end of this sh1te

Ulysses Gaze

Phoebas wrote: »

Is this going to be a thread where lots of people who have never even heard of Sarah Jeong before are going be outraged because she got a job in a paper they don't read?

I'm not outraged. I'm flabbergasted that the NYT is hiring her.

This sort of doubling down by the media is going to hand Trump the White House in 2020.

eagle eye

Racism these days is a two way street.

Why can't we all just be people, human beings.
There are idiots who make out that people with darker skin are a lower form of being. As I said idiots.
There are many black people who go around saying they are African-American/Irish/British etc. Those people need to stop doing that. Just call yourself American, British, Irish or wherever you were born. There is no need to highlight the colour of your skin.

As for the Roseanne thing, I think it's all ridiculous. Roseanne should be still on that TV show. Jarrett is a problem maker, looking for any angle and imo it's all for her own agenda which is to keep her in the news.

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

why do ye care so much about this

Phoebas wrote: »

Is this going to be a thread where lots of people who have never even heard of Sarah Jeong before are going be outraged because she got a job in a paper they don't read?

It's important to speak the truth to ourselves, because the media certainly won't do it.

Ulysses Gaze

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

I'm not outraged. I'm flabbergasted that the NYT is hiring her.

This sort of doubling down by the media is going to hand Trump the White House in 2020.

Unfortunately so. Barring the economy going completely to pot (which it will in no small part thanks to his policies, the question is when) he'll win handily in 2020.

Sal Butamol

If the Democrats and media focused on Trumps policies instead of their hysterical meltdowns and "muh Russian Hackers" bollox they'd handily defeat him at the next election.

But no, more hysteria is needed. Twats.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Phoebas wrote: »

Is this going to be a thread where lots of people who have never even heard of Sarah Jeong before are going be outraged because she got a job in a paper they don't read?

I’ve lived in the US and have read the NYT. I used to have a sub. Even after I left I kept an internet sub. It’s a fairly world famous newspaper although it’s definitely overrated.

Why would it matter if we never heard of Jeong before?

20Cent

Serious bang of gammon off this thread practicaly sizzling. Lol.

Call Me Jimmy

It's nice to see there is consistency in their hypocrisy.

xtal191

Have a scroll through these tweets

https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/1025437806775226368

Franz Von Peppercorn

20Cent wrote: »

Serious bang of gammon off this thread practicaly sizzling. Lol.

Is gammon some kind of anti Irish attack? Reported.

Sleeper12

Ulysses Gaze wrote:

Listen, I've argued that the Irish were enslaved for 800 years under the yoke of colonialism.

Ah we weren't really though. Things weren't always so bad under the Brits & don't forget that our 1916 heros were at the time considered criminals and vandals, by the Irish people themselves, till they were executed

Apart from the genocide that was the famine most Irish were content with their lot

Call Me Jimmy

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Is gammon some kind of anti Irish attack? Reported.

Better, it's white working class. They may even go as far as to say 'no, not working class. all white people' as a defense.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Ah we weren't really though. Things weren't always so bad under the Brits & don't forget that our 1916 heros were at the time considered criminals and vandals, by the Irish people themselves, till they were executed

Apart from the genocide that was the famine most Irish were content with their lot

That’s a whole rewrite of history. Happy with their lot under the penal laws?

When I mentioned slavery before i was thinking way back in time to vikings and before. Celts were major victims of roman slavery too, although they often sold each other into slavery.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Better, it's white working class. They may even go as far as to say 'no, not working class. all white people' as a defense.

Ethnic Irish people are white skinned. So are jews. Scots etc. European immigrants.

Might start a feedback thread on this anti Irish, anti Celtic, anti Semitic anti immigrant phrase.

Sleeper12

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote:

That’s a whole rewrite of history. Happy with their lot under the penal laws?

Ah jasus the Irish have always been happy. We've like to have a wee moan about things is all

20Cent

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Is gammon some kind of anti Irish attack? Reported.

No it's a joke about pompus white people getting all offended about nonsense.

Franz Von Peppercorn

20Cent wrote: »

No it's a joke about pompus white people getting all offended about nonsense.

Where did it come from? Which white people does it specifically target? Jews? Poles? Irish? Romanians? Or what?

It certainly didn’t originate here in Ireland which is a good reason why Irish people should worry about ideologies generated at the centre of the Empire and the employees at it’s “paper of record”

Blazer

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

She has a problem with Battlestar Galactica!!!!

oh **** u bitch..don't you dare slag off BSG...

Taytoland

It's absolutely laughable. It's some of the most racist tweets you will see and yet she isn't fired. It's basically if you are white, you are fair game, be as racist towards white people as much as you want but if it's the other way, it's instantly fired and vilified.

DickSwiveller Returns

I really don't care if she's sacked or not and won't be kicking up a storm. But just imagine the reaction if this had been the other way around. Are people like her so thick that they don't think sharing remarks like that will come back to bite them?

Yer Da sells Avon

jacksie66 wrote: »

Sure us white single men are the worst things in the world these days.

Some of us have gone very thin-skinned, constantly looking for things to be offended by.

Venom

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I really don't care if she's sacked or not and won't be kicking up a storm. But just imagine the reaction if this had been the other way around. Are people like her so thick that they don't think sharing remarks like that will come back to bite them?

The usual posters like the one who claims its just people getting worked up about nothing over this, would be foaming at the mouth if white was replaced with any other race in those tweets.


Sure if they didn't have double standards, they'd have none at all

Will I Am Not

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Some of us have gone very thin-skinned, constantly looking for things to be offended by.

Never heard of her and until today, don’t really care what she thinks. Am I allowed to agree that it’s double standards or does that make me offended by default?

DavidLyons_

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Some of us have gone very thin-skinned, constantly looking for things to be offended by.

I take then that if the word white were replaced by black or Syrian or traveller and the comments posted here you'd react in the same way should anyone take issue with it?