New York Times stands by 'racist tweets' reporter

[oneniltothearsenal]

She did one better by graduating Harvard Law.

In academia Berkeley is a much harder school than Harvard. Harvard has long been infamous for giving out easy grades and is honestly a joke when it comes to undergraduate academic training compared to the best schools.

"Harvard was hardly alone. Still, its numbers were particularly staggering. More than 90 percent of the class of 2001 had earned grade-point averages of B-minus or higher. Half of all the grades given the year before were As or A-minuses; only six percent were C-pluses or lower. "

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/03/the-truth-about-harvard/303726/

http://www.dailycal.org/2015/05/15/grade-deflation/

 

[Eboue]

its impossible to racist against hobbers

 

[SteveJ]

 

[Mockney]

No doubt there are a few people around here crazy enough to think you can't be racist against white people. But if we're going to go down the old privilege route we should maybe consider the fact that she's an Asian American (or Asian living in America?) and hence in the most privileged category in America.

Booya! An absolutely air-tight argument there, and one that goes a long way to explaining the obvious wholesale eradication of anti-semitism in the current modern world... what with no one ever blaming any ethnic group for any supposed undue power or influence over any situation, ever... And we're all a damn sight better off for none of that kind of silliness, aren't we?

As we are, for that matter, with the similarly indisputable and welcoming integration received by all British Indian families over the last 40+ years. Thanks to their status as the highest earning ethnic group in the UK rendering them clearly invulnerable from realistic racism of any kind... Hooray for such solid conservative logic. Facts don't care about your feelings, 'n all that. Dribble dribble dribble dribble, PC gone mad, dribble dribble, etc....

 

[Cheesy]

Pretending Hobbers doesn't post at all is generally easier.

 

[Raoul]

In academia Berkeley is a much harder school than Harvard. Harvard has long been infamous for giving out easy grades and is honestly a joke when it comes to undergraduate academic training compared to the best schools.

"Harvard was hardly alone. Still, its numbers were particularly staggering. More than 90 percent of the class of 2001 had earned grade-point averages of B-minus or higher. Half of all the grades given the year before were As or A-minuses; only six percent were C-pluses or lower. "

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/03/the-truth-about-harvard/303726/

http://www.dailycal.org/2015/05/15/grade-deflation/

I'm talking mainly based on perception of actual employers.

 

[hobbers]

Booya! An absolutely air-tight argument there, and one that goes a long way to explaining the obvious wholesale eradication of anti-semitism in the current modern world... what with no one ever blaming any ethnic group for any supposed undue power or influence over any situation, ever... And we're all a damn sight better off for none of that kind of silliness, aren't we?

As we are, for that matter, with the similarly indisputable and welcoming integration received by all British Indian families over the last 40+ years. Thanks to their status as the highest earning ethnic group in the UK rendering them clearly invulnerable from realistic racism of any kind... Hooray for such solid conservative logic. Facts don't care about your feelings, 'n all that. Dribble dribble dribble dribble, PC gone mad, dribble dribble, etc....

Looks like my post flew way, way above your head, and a few others. Never mind. This is what happens when I overestimate people and pre-empt a common line of argument.

"So what you're saying is that it's impossible to be racist against groups that are successful in society like Jews and Asians rabble rabble rabble derp a derp rabble rabble."

No. And if you had even half a brain you'd have understood my post was arguing precisely against that idea.

 

[Mockney]

In which case I welcome your liberal conversion, and congratulate you on such an amusingly convincing and ironic post.
I thought my post was about how wealth is no barrier to prejudice, whereas yours was about how hypocritical a strawman would be to deny anti-white racism when other races can be both offended and rich! But my apologies if I got that wrong. That would seem like a really dumb argument in fairness.

Maybe together we can being down whitey once and for all, hobs!

And I hope you also agree that focusing on the few loud liberals claiming “minorities can’t be racist” is just a disingenuous distraction, aimed at ignoring any kind of nuance.

Of course minorities can be racist, but just cos they technically can, doesn’t mean an Asian person making anti-white statements in 21st century Trump’s America has anything approaching the same level of meaning, context or social influence as a white person making anti-Asian statements does. And anyone claiming theres any equivalence is the same kind of smug smarmy troll who pretends to be offended by the word “cracker” just to excuse saying the N-word in a Drake song. Or the type of paranoid suburban shut in who’d call the police if the black guy next door was playing his music too loud... Eitherway, cnuts.

 

[hobbers]

Of course minorities can be racist, but just cos they technically can, doesn’t mean an Asian person making anti-white statements in 21st century Trump’s America has anything approaching the same level of meaning, context or social influence as a white person making anti-Asian statements does. And anyone claiming theres any equivalence is the same kind of smug smarmy troll who pretends to be offended by the word “cracker” just to excuse saying the N-word in a Drake song. Or the type of paranoid suburban shut in who’d call the police if the black guy next door was playing his music too loud... Eitherway, cnuts.

If we're talking about context, you would acknowledge that a NYT journalist tweeting broad brush anti-white racism is a little bit more influential than anonymous trolls tweeting about eating dogs, right?

And on another serious note, since your genuine championing of nuance is so refreshing, especially on this forum... does socioeconomic performance come into these measures of equivalency at all? Given that Asian Americans are ahead of white Americans in basically every regard, why then is it impossible to even consider that anti-white and anti-Asian racism might be approaching equivalence?

 

[Man of Leisure]

the new york times did nothing about serial sexual assaulter glenn thrush so of course they dont care about this

What did that guy do? I watched that Showtime documentary of The NY Times covering Trump’s first year in office, but they didn’t go into much detail about what he actually did.

 

[Man of Leisure]

Just because I am in a pedant mood : technically it can't be racism per se because "white" is not a race or ethnicity. So its technically just prejudice.

Huh? How is white (Caucasian) not a race?

Quite likely.
There is a chance shes just not very bright and got some abuse, checked the twitter profile and responded in kind.. in anger.

Doesnt justify the tweets. No intention of defender her. I dont care..

If the best case is that she is stupid, then I wouldnt feel bad if she lost her job because of it. More important things to worry about.

She went to Harvard Law, so I doubt she’s lacking in intelligence. While I’m sure she’s smart as shit, she could still be an idiot.

You can be racist towards white folks - it's just harder to discriminate or offend white people using race. For instance, there is a big difference between calling someone a white prick vs a black prick. One is far more offensive and naturally will have far harsher implications.

Not really seeing the difference myself between the bolded. Now if you replace “white prick” with “cracker” and “black prick” with the n-word, then that’s another story.

And on another serious note, since your genuine championing of nuance is so refreshing, especially on this forum... does socioeconomic performance come into these measures of equivalency at all? Given that Asian Americans are ahead of white Americans in basically every regard, why then is it impossible to even consider that anti-white and anti-Asian racism might be approaching equivalence?

You keep saying this, but how so? I mean it’s clearly better being white than any other race in America.

 

[hobbers]

You keep saying this, but how so? I mean it’s clearly better being white than any other race in America.

Well, probably not quite every regard. But certainly in regards to education, college degrees, advanced degrees, high skilled jobs, household incomes, intact family units... So with that being the case, whether it's better to be white or Asian in America isn't really quite so clear cut.

 

[VorZakone]

A bit too much playing down in this thread for my liking. What she tweeted was racist.

 

[Don Alfredo]

Is it wrong that I think she should be fired because she is a journalist? I mean if an engineer had racist views, that would be bad but I would assume it wouldn‘t influence his work that much.

If you are the NYT, you should care if any of your journalists has racist views. One would think that that would have a pretty big effect on their work. Unless the editorial line of the NYT has changed and I didn‘t get the memo.

I also think journalists should be far more accountable for what they write on twitter than any other group (except for politicians). I know they write „personal views“ in their bio, but their tweets contain news and opinion the same way a newspaper does. Many people use journalists on twitter as sources for news and they certainly know or should know Twitter is not some private chatting with friends, but giving your stance on a topic to a certain audience. If they post shit, they should get called out for it.

 

[Chairman Woodie]

I don't think Jeong's past tweets should deny her the opportunity of advancing in her career. But Jeong's response to her harassers was unnecessary. Blocking or muting would have been better.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[do.ob]

I think handling it this way hurts the integrity of the NYT: when you're a journalist you have to be held to a(n even) higher standard, especially if you're on the editorial board of a left leaning paper that wants to be respectable. They have kind of lost their moral authority on racism issues with that statement, it's a bit baffling to me that they would do this.

 

[Handré1990]

We are when it suits our agendas, less so when it doesn't.

Bang on the money. In Norway some semi-governmental body awarded a prestigous award for the ‘spread of justice and democratic values’ to a muslim girl who obviously hates us white Norwegians, going by a pretty impressive record of racist and, quite frankly, sensationalist conspiracy theorizing tweets aimed at white people.

Racism is racism, and should be delt with accordingly.

 

[MadMike]

Can I wade face first into a shitstorm regarding the “you can’t be racist towards white people”?

First off it goes without saying that this generic statement does not hold, but I don’t think that’s what’s being said in general. This is an intentionally cut short version of the generally well-argumented position that “black people can’t be racist towards white people”. Which itself comes with further context specific to its origin which is that we’re basically talking about black Americans and white Americans exclusively. Though it's been used in South Africa as well. The argumentation is based om both the definition of racism and the historical context of relations between white and black people in America.

So the definition of racism is: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

I've highlighted the part that is being used in defence of the position mentioned above. It's also what sets apart racism from mere prejudice. What is being argued is that for black people who've grown up in America (and this could apply to the rest of the West too) it's extremely unlikely, bordering on impossible, for them to form the opinion that they are superior. They go through an education both in school and in life that generally unconsciously prevents that. You pick up a physics, maths or history book and it's basically all achievements and discoveries of white people. You pick up money with white peoples' faces on. You look around you and you see larger concentration of money and power with white people. And when you read about your history it's one of subjugation, slavery, dehumanisation and subsequent fight for emancipation. These hardly give fertile ground to form an opinion of black superiority. It's usually more of a fight to convince black people of their own self worth and equal ability rather than anything else.

The second point that is being made is that when a race have been the victims of oppression for centuries and still feel they are second class citizens in the modern society it's only natural to form a dislike, prejudice or hate towards the oppressor. "A man cannot hate the whip with which he is being flogged but then be expected to love the person doing the flogging".

So what is basically said is that yes black people can be hateful and prejudiced towards white people. But because of the unequal footing they find themselves in society and the still rampant racism towards them... it's only natural that such feelings will emerge. And since there's a near impossibility to form a view of their own superiority this prejudice or hate does not translate into racism. Just some things to ponder over.

None of this historical context seems to apply to Korean-American Sarah Jeong though, so she's fresh out of rational explanations. I'm not fond of dragging old tweets to bury people with, but the correct action is to own up and apologise. So long as she did that and her current views don't match those earlier tweets, she should be good. But of course there's a bit of double standards forming at the moment where if the situation was reversed and it was a white writer making these remarks against Asians, he or she would have been out there door before their feet touch the ground.

 

[Ødegaard]

I don't think Jeong's past tweets should deny her the opportunity of advancing in her career. But Jeong's response to her harassers was unnecessary. Blocking or muting would have been better.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Racist Times. Oh well.

 

[do.ob]

Can I wade face first into a shitstorm regarding the “you can’t be racist towards white people”?

First off it goes without saying that this generic statement does not hold, but I don’t think that’s what’s being said in general. This is an intentionally cut short version of the generally well-argumented position that “black people can’t be racist towards white people”. Which itself comes with further context specific to its origin which is that we’re basically talking about black Americans and white Americans exclusively. Though it's been used in South Africa as well. The argumentation is based om both the definition of racism and the historical context of relations between white and black people in America.

So the definition of racism is: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

I've highlighted the part that is being used in defence of the position mentioned above. It's also what sets apart racism from mere prejudice. What is being argued is that for black people who've grown up in America (and this could apply to the rest of the West too) it's extremely unlikely, bordering on impossible, for them to form the opinion that they are superior. They go through an education both in school and in life that generally unconsciously prevents that. You pick up a physics, maths or history book and it's basically all achievements and discoveries of white people. You pick up money with white peoples' faces on. You look around you and you see larger concentration of money and power with white people. And when you read about your history it's one of subjugation, slavery, dehumanisation and subsequent fight for emancipation. These hardly give fertile ground to form an opinion of black superiority. It's usually more of a fight to convince black people of their own self worth and equal ability rather than anything else.

The second point that is being made is that when a race have been the victims of oppression for centuries and still feel they are second class citizens in the modern society it's only natural to form a dislike, prejudice or hate towards the oppressor. "A man cannot hate the whip with which he is being flogged but then be expected to love the person doing the flogging".

So what is basically said is that yes black people can be hateful and prejudiced towards white people. But because of the unequal footing they find themselves in society and the still rampant racism towards them... it's only natural that such feelings will emerge. And since there's a near impossibility to form a view of their own superiority this prejudice or hate does not translate into racism. Just some things to ponder over.

None of this historical context seems to apply to Korean-American Sarah Jeong though, so she's fresh out of rational explanations. I'm not fond of dragging old tweets to bury people with, but the correct action is to own up and apologise. So long as she did that and her current views don't match those earlier tweets, she should be good. But of course there's a bit of double standards forming at the moment where if the situation was reversed and it was a white writer making these remarks against Asians, he or she would have been out there door before their feet touch the ground.

I find it hard to agree with that. Racist views don't have to encompass every aspect, they can be selective to certain aspects (some racial stereotypes even say X are better at Y) and superiority can be perceived in more than material ways, not to mention that the historical aspect you mentioned can be largely explained by racist oppression. I don't think anyone will dispute that white on x racism carries a sharper edge, because of the historical context or that it is a bigger part of our current societies and that this explains certain reactions, but that doesn't mean that people can't be racist towards whites, nor that some forms of racism are acceptable.

 

[Shane88]

Satire is a pretty flimsy but seemingly effective veil for being a cnut.

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is blatant racism. People have been fired for much less.

 

[Tarrou]

Not usually in a favour of canning people for past actions, but in the case of a newspaper and racist tweets I really don’t understand how they can take any other action. This stance will be used as a stick to beat them whenever similar stories crop up that they need to report on.

In other professions I would be more considerate of the circumstances surrounding it all. But she’s a journalist, she has to be held to the highest standards IMO.

 

[Penna]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This is blatant racism. People have been fired for much less.

Those tweets are truly horrible and extremely offensive.

 

[MadMike]

I find it hard to agree with that. Racist views don't have to encompass every aspect, they can be selective to certain aspects (some racial stereotypes even say X are better at Y) and superiority can be perceived in more than material ways, not to mention that the historical aspect you mentioned can be largely explained by racist oppression. I don't think anyone will dispute that white on x racism carries a sharper edge, because of the historical context or that it is a bigger part of our current societies and that this explains certain reactions, but that doesn't mean that people can't be racist towards whites, nor that some forms of racism are acceptable.

I don't understand what you mean. What do you mean by "the historical aspect you mentioned can be largely explained by racist oppression"? Which historical aspect in particular? And what do you mean by "superiority can be perceived in more than material ways"? Generally racist propaganda fixes on physical and intellectual capabilities along with ethos. I'm struggling to understand the point you're trying to make.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

Can I wade face first into a shitstorm regarding the “you can’t be racist towards white people”?

First off it goes without saying that this generic statement does not hold, but I don’t think that’s what’s being said in general. This is an intentionally cut short version of the generally well-argumented position that “black people can’t be racist towards white people”. Which itself comes with further context specific to its origin which is that we’re basically talking about black Americans and white Americans exclusively. Though it's been used in South Africa as well. The argumentation is based om both the definition of racism and the historical context of relations between white and black people in America.

So the definition of racism is: prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.

I've highlighted the part that is being used in defence of the position mentioned above. It's also what sets apart racism from mere prejudice. What is being argued is that for black people who've grown up in America (and this could apply to the rest of the West too) it's extremely unlikely, bordering on impossible, for them to form the opinion that they are superior. They go through an education both in school and in life that generally unconsciously prevents that. You pick up a physics, maths or history book and it's basically all achievements and discoveries of white people. You pick up money with white peoples' faces on. You look around you and you see larger concentration of money and power with white people. And when you read about your history it's one of subjugation, slavery, dehumanisation and subsequent fight for emancipation. These hardly give fertile ground to form an opinion of black superiority. It's usually more of a fight to convince black people of their own self worth and equal ability rather than anything else.

The second point that is being made is that when a race have been the victims of oppression for centuries and still feel they are second class citizens in the modern society it's only natural to form a dislike, prejudice or hate towards the oppressor. "A man cannot hate the whip with which he is being flogged but then be expected to love the person doing the flogging".

So what is basically said is that yes black people can be hateful and prejudiced towards white people. But because of the unequal footing they find themselves in society and the still rampant racism towards them... it's only natural that such feelings will emerge. And since there's a near impossibility to form a view of their own superiority this prejudice or hate does not translate into racism. Just some things to ponder over.

None of this historical context seems to apply to Korean-American Sarah Jeong though, so she's fresh out of rational explanations. I'm not fond of dragging old tweets to bury people with, but the correct action is to own up and apologise. So long as she did that and her current views don't match those earlier tweets, she should be good. But of course there's a bit of double standards forming at the moment where if the situation was reversed and it was a white writer making these remarks against Asians, he or she would have been out there door before their feet touch the ground.

"Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men."

OK, but she is still ageist and sexist though right?

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

Those tweets are truly horrible and extremely offensive.

After doing some research, which i probably should've done before i posted it, the context is that she was replying with those tweets as an answer to some racist tweets toward herself.
Still wasn't the smartest idea by her, but it does excuse her a bit.

Many alt-righters are taking advantage of those tweets i can imagine. Also trolls on 4chan are doing what they can to create more drama out of the situation.

 

[Mrs Smoker]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I'm foreign to twitter, how to check which racist tweet she answered with this one?

 

[Mrs Smoker]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Totally burned that guy who she replied to.


If she replied to, I can't tell.

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Totally burned that guy who she replied to.


If she replied to, I can't tell.

It's not a reply to anyone. But she was probably being trolled by people calling her gook or whatever, and thought it was a smart idea trolling back by writing some racist bs about "white people".

Tbh, i don't really know enough about this situation, but she doesn't come out of this looking good whatever the context is.

 

[do.ob]

I don't understand what you mean. What do you mean by "the historical aspect you mentioned can be largely explained by racist oppression"? Which historical aspect in particular? And what do you mean by "superiority can be perceived in more than material ways"? Generally racist propaganda fixes on physical and intellectual capabilities along with ethos. I'm struggling to understand the point you're trying to make.

My point is that it would be stupid to interpret the "whiteness" of historical achievements as (inherent) racial superiority, when most blacks were denied the necessary education. Thus it doesn't mean that non-whites can't feel superior in the present. "more than material ways" was just mentioned to say that money, power and stuff from history books aren't the only aspects that one can develop racist feelings about.

 

[MadMike]

"Oh man it's kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men."

OK, but she is still ageist and sexist though right?

She's not black, she's Korean. She doesn't have the historical context of white oppression, slavery, the KKK. She's also not a part of a badly stereotyped group of people. Or a a community struggling with high unemployment rates and low levels of education, living in inner city ghettos and getting shot at first chance by police. Even by the strictest terms of what racism is, I don't see how she could be afforded protection or excuse.

 

[villain]

Oh boy, where to even start with this

 

[VeevaVee]

She's sounds like an absolute cnut. Those tweets have real venom behind them as well. Not that we should be ranking racism, but it's not just some off the cuff joke.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Oh look, whitey getting all salty because an Asian lady fights fire with fire after so much abuse and provocation over th years.

Not a peep out of one of you virtue signaling fecks when minorities are abused and killed just for being a different colour.


I’m ashamed to be a white transracial black man.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Oh boy, where to even start with this

Best to laugh at it all and not get drawn in too much. No good will come of it.

 

[MadMike]

My point is that it would be stupid to interpret the "whiteness" of historical achievements as (inherent) racial superiority, when most blacks were denied the necessary education.

Well duh, who even argued that? My point is not that whiteness of historical achievements and financial/military domination is proof of white superiority. It's that a pretty fecking efficient shield against arguments or thoughts of white inferiority. If you're the one who's asserting control over others, how can the ones being controlled develop thoughts of their own superiority over the people doing the controlling? And even if they do, how easy it for the one who's in control to laugh them off based on their standing?

"more than material ways" was just mentioned to say that money, power and stuff from history books aren't the only aspects that one can develop racist feelings about.

Still have no idea what you're talking about here. You're gonna have to elaborate again (if you can be bothered) and give an example because you're being overly generic again with no specific point.

 

[VorZakone]

Oh boy, where to even start with this

What's there to start? All forms of racism are bad, whether it's from whites towards blacks, Asians towards whites etc etc.

 

[MadMike]

Oh boy, where to even start with this

From the top please.

 

[SwansonsTache]

Oh look, whitey getting all salty because an Asian lady fights fire with fire after so much abuse and provocation over th years.

Not a peep out of one of you virtue signaling fecks when minorities are abused and killed just for being a different colour.


I’m ashamed to be a white transracial black man.

Reel it in. A case of a white reporter in the NYC spouting the same shite about someone black or Asian would have a thread and reactions just like this. Only difference would be that the person would be out of a job, so we'd have less controversy to discuss.