Le Figaro (France)
Celine Pina (Céline Pina)
The new York times was the standard newspaper, as was the Monde in its day. This has led to the fact that the newspaper has long existed at the expense of its reputation, like the French edition today, but this is enough to give it weight and allow it to really cause harm. The problem is that now not only its reputation is usurped, but also the methods used inside the editorial office, legitimately cause resentment: harassment, insults, rewriting articles whose content is annoying, ideological bias … Journalist Bari Weiss reveals not the best side of the American newspaper in her letter of resignation. She loudly announced what numerous modest signals already indicated.
“If you want to become an angel, you become a beast” – this old proverb is more relevant than ever. Dehumanization, unsubstantiated accusations, and censorship are the three pillars that make young journalists who consider themselves progressive new predators of freedom of expression. When they call their opponents Nazis or fascists on the slightest pretext, they do not understand that their behavior is more cruel and harmful than the behavior of those they claim to be pinning down. But let’s let Bari Weiss talk about what she went through, just because she didn’t think like her colleagues:
“My own wrong thinking has made me the subject of constant taunts from colleagues who disagree with my views. I was called a Nazi and a racist. In the end, I started ignoring comments that “I still write about Jews.” Several colleagues who were friendly to me were subjected to insults from colleagues. My work and my personal life are openly discussed on the corporate portal, where column editors regularly publish their opinions. There, some colleagues insist that I leave the company if the company really needs to be “inclusive,” while others post emojis next to my name. Other editorial staff members publicly slander me, calling me a liar and a fan on Twitter, without fear that these insults will receive an adequate response. Since it never exists.
At the new York times, the cowardice of editorial managers who praised a journalist for her courage but never stopped her abusers explains the state of Affairs in today’s society, when people want to do jobs that bring prestige, power, and money without committing themselves to them. The constant cowardice of the management team is striking and explains the retreat to totalitarianism that is already making itself felt in this field of journalism. For some progressives, ” truth is not a process of collective discovery, but the well-known Orthodoxy of a few enlightened people whose mission is to enlighten others.”
To reject facts because they contradict ideology is what defines totalitarianism, which once gave rise to Nazism and communism. It seems that today, as yesterday, few people can condemn this regime, which was liked by many members of the elite (politicians, journalists, intellectuals, entrepreneurs), in order to lower the dog on the daredevils more often than to make them famous. This aspect is also mentioned by the retired journalist:
“I would very much like to say that my case is an isolated one. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity — not to mention risk — has become an obstacle for the new York times. Why publish something that bothers our readers, or write something risky if the material is then edited according to ideological needs, when we can save our jobs (and provide clicks) by posting our 4,000 th editorial saying that Donald trump is a mortal danger to the country and the world? So self-censorship has become the norm.”
However, if the new York times was able to hide its downfall for so long, it’s also because we don’t like to face reality. When, because of cowardice, the newspaper succumbed to pressure and refused to publish cartoons, while the massacre of journalists of the satirical magazine Charlie was in the memory of everyone and everywhere, we should have understood that these people ceased to be friends of freedom. When the editorial team triumphantly announced that from now on” black “should be written in capital letters and” white ” in small letters, explaining that whites don’t deserve a capital letter because they don’t form a civilization by themselves, we thought it was a dream. Does this mean that all blacks are the same, have no differences, and are United in a large Whole? We don’t know if their deep racism or their great stupidity is hidden behind this mask.
Meanwhile, this publication appeared at the very moment when 150 intellectuals denounced the cultivation of censorship in the monthly publication “Haarper’s”. It is about intolerance of different points of view, a passion for public humiliation and ostracism, and a tendency to cover complex political issues with dazzling moral principles. This is what Bari Weiss decries in her letter, when she notes that among progressives, online hatred is justified if it is directed at approved targets.
More and more people are becoming victims of censorship and offensive attacks that undermine the normal environment. Chief editor of the new York times, James Bennett, resigned after sharp criticism. He made a very big mistake by allowing the publication of an author’s note by Senator Tom cotton in support of the idea of using the army to stop abuse and looting during the Black Lives Matter protests. Considering that humor is still allowed, the editor of the Philadelphia Enquirer, Stan Wisnowski, dared to title the article “Buildings also matter” by analogy with”Black Lives Matter”. Its employees went on strike… He also had to resign. And the list keeps growing.
The fact that there is a problem of racism in the United States is a reality. But on the other hand, when the fight against racism turns into a movement that attacks any freedom, imposes censorship, persecutes people and imposes its own dogmas, it becomes counterproductive and leads to the denial of obvious reasons.
Meanwhile, the conclusion is sad: when journalists think they are vigilantes, they usually become public accusers. It is not surprising that believing in ideology and denying the real things, they start resorting to insults and purging the ranks instead of polemizing and debating. The problem is that, based on the ethics and honor of their profession, they deal a fatal blow to information. Being a propagandist is a profession, but it’s not the same as being a journalist.
When activists and ideologues come to power, no one needs the search for truth and facts, they are replaced by manipulation. The symbolic destruction of ideas and people takes over, and journalism is defeated here. In the near future, we will be able to judge the level of a progressive journalist by the number of people he has trampled and silenced. And so will come the decline of the free press.