Right the author could totally write an article defending Weiss as a friend objectively, or even deliberately diving into the subjective to talk about the Bari they know, instead there’s this weird mix where it wants to act objective but is also ranting and raving about delusional haters
TRUMP: Boy, she asks a lot of questions. Who are you with?
BURNS: Politico. Dasha Burns, sir
TRUMP: Dasha, Politico, ugh. Politico has gone bad. They've been so wrong about everything. Let's get somebody else to ask some questions. You mind? Politico is fake news.
I dunno, it seemed important the first time he said it, the obsessions with death, however he keeps saying it, which makes me think it’s just bullshitting for sympathy, he wants head pats.
It doesn’t get much press for obvious reasons, and it only shows up occasionally, but there’s a version of Trump that appeared after he took office again that’s atypically melancholic and resigned.
It also showed up in his first (but very much not his second) National Prayer Breakfast speech.
You’d think a friend could draw on their friendship to defend their friend? Like talk about good things they’ve done or said? But no. Just a rant against haters.
Having read the article it’s actually profoundly weird how uninterested the author is in actually defending Weiss. She mainly just denounces Weiss’ critics as deranged without actually bothering to defend Weiss on any of the specifics.
Honestly it might say something that such a close friend of Weiss can’t actually defend her in any meaningful way on a personal level, and instead spends all her time denouncing not even just Weiss’ critics but the media in general at points. Weiss needs better friends.
Oh yeah. It’s also written by a woman who is openly calling Weiss, her wife, and her sister, close friends…. Genuinely confused why you’d think that this could in anyway be a smart objective piece given the authors clear biases.
This is the problem with letting someone who openly admits to being close friends with both the subject and their family, of writing on those people. They cannot be objective.
You’d sort of think the logical next question would be isn’t the free press inherently an ideological project that largely function on the whims of Weiss? One that also heavily blurred the lines of opinion and news?
Also it’s a great bit the part about claiming Weiss left The New York Times because she felt the paper abandons their core principles such as a “sharp line between opinion and reporting” and “an approach to news and editorials that wasn’t prey to whims or axioms of political ideology…”
Also the sentence “Weiss is a hugely successful journalist and entrepreneur, and the target —especially from others within her field— of Bari Weiss-derangement syndrome” is a real choice. Really that’s just terrible writing.
I’ve read the article and am flummoxed that anyone would think it is smart. It’s mainly concerned with denouncing the critics of Weiss as deranged haters. It doesn’t even really dive in to any of the criticisms, it just waves it away. Ironically this means it also does a poor job of defending Weiss.
We get the final paragraph that briefly mentions the criticisms that she lacks experience, but only to dismiss it out of hand. It doesn’t even defend Weiss on the actual points the article itself brings up. Dismissing them all as haters writing hateful stories, again this is a bad article
It would be profoundly easy to actually do this, it would be very easy to actually listen to what people are saying or talk to her critics and ask them questions, instead this article portrays Weiss critics as just anxiety ridden jokes. This is not a serious article, it is bad.
This article is extremely hyperbolic and repeatedly describes critics of Weiss of being deranged, it dives headlong into “feelings about feelings” territory wherein the author mainly rants about their own vague feelings of others feelings. At no point does it discuss actual criticisms of Weiss.
Would not be first time they embraced the medical fringe, Peterson went to Russia to be put in medically induced coma for dubious reasons, because no one in America would do it.
The entire last episode is a set up, it feels more invested in establishing the background lore for Salvation and Checkmate then actually giving us a good finale.
A lot of people in the media no longer see their job as informing their audience and telling them the truth, they instead seek to challenge their audience and to that end they set out to confuse and disorientate. To leave their audience scratching their head and wondering about what is true
