The New York Times' motto is “All the News That’s Fit To Print.” But obviously, being “fit to print” is not a standard that applies to their editorial board.
The Times came under fire Thursday after it was discovered that their new tech writing hire Sarah Jeong had a history on Twitter of incredibly racist, now-deleted, anti-white tweets. Many are so offensive or profane that I can’t even quote them; but nothing on the Internet ever really goes away, and conservative sites quickly pulled them out of the memory hole and posted them in full. Some of the more repeatable ones included that white people deserve to live underground “like groveling goblins,” that whiteness is “awful,” that white people have “stopped breeding” and will “go extinct soon” and “this was my plan all along,” that she was “comparing Trump to Hitler before it was cool,” and “Oh man, it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.” “Kind of” sick, Sarah? Try “incredibly sick.”
You might expect that having discovered her history, the uber-sensitive liberals at the New York Times would drop Jeong like a boiling hot copy of my book, “God, Guns, Grits and Gravy” (a New York Times bestseller, which must’ve just killed them to admit.) After all, back in February, it took them only hours to fire their new lead opinion writer after discovering she’d retweeted a single tweet with one word in it that African-Americans found derogatory and that she admitted being friends with some people who are white supremacists.
Instead, they are standing by Jeong. They had “candid conversations” with Jeong, examined her anti-white tweets “in context,” and decided that she didn’t really mean she vomited at the sight of white people and wanted them all to die when she wrote that she vomited at the sight of white people and wanted them all to die. They understand that she was just “counter-trolling” people who’d aimed racist tweets at her by aiming even more racist tweets back at them. Because the way that an intelligent, civilized professional journalist deals with racism is with more racism.
Oh, but we must understand it was “satire.” She was only joking! (Ask any stand-up comic how understanding the Times editors would be of them of them telling jokes that parody racism by sounding incredibly racist.) The Times editorial board declared that it is “confident that she will be an important voice for the editorial board moving forward.” Or at least, a typically representative biased, hypocritical voice.
Incidentally, here’s a reminder that only two months ago, the Times ran an editorial staunchly defending the canceling of Roseanne Barr’s show over one tweet. The writer's argument was that her firing was justified because it wasn’t merely offensive, it was racist, and racism is intolerable.
The Times editors like to call conservatives hypocrites. When the Roseanne incident happened, even though she was on the only pro-Trump show on broadcast TV, I said it was justified to fire her because racism is intolerable. Now, apparently, the Times thinks it’s not only tolerable, it’s explainable. Even forgivable. When they do it.
Their new motto: “All the Hypocrisy It’s Unfit to Print.”