Tucker Carlson vs. The ‘Journalistic Tattletale and Censorship Business’
It’s just too rich. A Taylor Lorenz, a tech reporter for the New York Times, is criticized by Fox ‘Tucker Carlson. And the New York Times – not to mention Reporter Lorenz – is freaking out.
As described here by NBs Clay Waters and also by Nicholas Fondacaro, Lorenz recently tweeted:
For International Women’s Day, support women exposed to online harassment. It is no exaggeration to say that the harassment and smear campaign I suffered over the past year ruined my life. Nobody should have to go through this.
– Taylor Lorenz (@TaylorLorenz) March 9, 2021
Fox’s inimitable Tucker Carlson saw the tweet and had the nerve … the nerve! … to mock the tweet and its author. This upset the New York Times, it made the following statement:
“In a now familiar move, Tucker Carlson opened his show last night by attacking a journalist. It was a calculated and cruel tactic that he regularly used to trigger a wave of harassment and vitriol on his intended target.
Taylor Lorenz is a talented New York Times journalist who produces timely and critical reporting. Journalists should be able to do their jobs without harassment. “
You don’t know whether to laugh at the ridiculous Lorenz tweet or the Times statement. It is the Times itself, not to mention all sorts of left-wing television and print / internet outlets, that routinely “create a wave of harassment and vitriol” at Tucker. The Times loves to write articles about Tucker advertisers who have been intimidated by leftists into leaving the company. It was a downright lie that he “mocked immigrants”. The attacks go on and on. Even at his house where his wife is trembling.
Taylor Lorenz couldn’t imagine the attacks. In fact, Lorenz and others at The Times are really about censorship. And Tucker Carlson has the common sense not to put up with feeling victimized by privileged elites who have made themselves Hall monitors.
Also note the Times’ statement that Lorenz provides “timely and material reporting.” Suffice it to say that there are real journalists who disagree. Glenn Greenwald of Substack wrote an article entitled “The journalistic tattletale and censorship industry is suffering several well-deserved blows. “
A new and fast growing one In recent years a journalistic “beat” has emerged which can best be described as an unholy mixture of tattling on the junior high hall monitor and Stasi-like public surveillance. It’s half youthful and half malicious. Its main goals are control, censorship, and the destruction of the reputation for fun and power. Although the epicenter is the largest corporate medium, it is the opposite of journalism.
I have already written about a particularly poisonous strain of this authoritarian “reporting”. Journalism teams at three of the most influential media companies – CNN’s “Media Reporters” (Brian Stelter and Oliver Darcy), NBC’s “Disinformation Space Unit” (Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny), and the tech reporters for the New York Times (Mike Isaac, Kevin Roose, Sheera Frenkel ) – devote most of their “journalism” to looking for online spaces in which they believe that language and behavioral rules have been violated, flag them up and then plead that punitive measures be taken (prohibition, censorship, content regulation, detention) the school). These Hall Monitor reporters are a major factor in explaining why tech monopolies who (for reasons of self-interest and ideology) never wanted to censor responsibility are now doing so with devotion and seemingly arbitrary blunt violence: they are being driven by the loudest in the world puts media companies to shame if they don’t.
… The profound pathologies Driving all of this was seen on Saturday night as the result of a ruthless and self-humiliating smear campaign by one of the New York Times’ star tech reporters Taylor Lorenz. She falsely and very publicly accused Silicon Valley entrepreneur and investor Marc Andreessen of using the word “lagging” during a discussion about the Reddit / GameStop uprising.
Lorenz lied. Andreessen never used this word. And instead of apologizing and withdrawing, she justified her mistake by saying it was a “male voice” that sounded like his, and then blocked her Twitter account as if she were – and not the person she mistakenly made had slandered – the victim. “
Roger that? Long before Tucker Carlson said a word about Lorenz, Glenn Greenwald realized not only what she was really about, but also her right to sacrifice.
What Lorenz is really about, as some real journalists have found, is “Hall Monitor Journalism”. And to criticize what she does is “harassment”.
That would be seriously amusing if it wasn’t so dangerous. Lorenz – not to mention the Times itself – has made it an individual and collective task to invade the privacy of all kinds of people in their private internet guarantees.
As Clay Waters noted and Taibbi took up the following:
The subtext is not difficult to decipher. These people believe that bad thinking if left unaddressed will result in Donald Trump being elected. Therefore, as Chen and Roose put it in a chat last week, it is “problematic” to support platforms that allow large numbers of people to congregate in unsupervised “shadow” social networks where they are “misinformation.” “Can spread and cause errors. possibly a “ton of chaos”. Countless stories have been written on the subject of what language should be “allowed” as if they were the ones who should be doing the allowing.
What can be clearly seen here is that Tucker Carlson hit a nerve when he called on Lorenz to play the victim when she made it her business to investigate all kinds of people in the tech world for “unapproved thoughts,” as Taibbi says.
The real bottom line of the New York Times freak is that the American left – especially the New York Times – wants to silence conservative media. Period and forever.