Bari Weiss and the Loss of Journalistic Integrity
Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few years, you’ve probably heard something about the “biased media.” If you’re left-of-center, politically speaking, you may think that this phrase only applies to right-wing news outlets, such as Fox or Breitbart News. If you’re right-of-center, you may believe that this phrase only applies to companies like CNN, MSNBC, or Vox Media.
In all likelihood, both perspectives hold some truth: both left and right-wing news companies are generally partial to the political perspectives of their audiences. But if you think that this is acceptable, or that it’s simply an unfortunate status quo, you’re sorely mistaken, for the current state of our institutional media is far worse than one may think, and it will continue to descend into harmful chaos, if it proceeds unchecked.
For the time being, I’ll just cite one enormously important example that’s developed over the last twenty-four hours: Bari Weiss, a high-profile writer and opinion editor for the New York Times, left her job yesterday via an eviscerating resignation letter. (I encourage you to read it in its entirety – it’s well worth your time.)
In it, Weiss cites two main reasons for her departure. The first, and perhaps most alarming, reason is that Weiss claims that the Times rejects any writing that departs from a “predetermined narrative”; that is, the Times believes that truth is an “orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few” who possess the task of educating everyone around them of it.
If you’re a habitual consumer of the Times, it’s not difficult to know what type of orthodoxy that’s espoused: the orthodoxy of the current postmodern far Left.
To make matters worse, Weiss says that the Times’ editorial board has lost its backbone, and that it bows to online mobs who refuse to read views that conflict with their own. She says:
“Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.”
It’s truly scary stuff. But this reason alone isn’t why Weiss left the Times; she also cites a toxic work environment, which is the result of her intellectual dissent:
“My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.”
Weiss also believes that she is not alone in her situation; budding, independent-minded journalists are also prone to similar cancellations. If such people are to advance their careers, Weiss believes that they’ll have to follow the three rules of current journalism:
“Rule One: Speak your mind at your own peril. Rule Two: Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative. Rule Three: Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain. Eventually, the publisher will cave to the mob, the editor will get fired or reassigned, and you’ll be hung out to dry.”
If Weiss is to be believed and trusted (which she should be – there’s no evidence of any ill intent), then every single person in the country should be alarmed. If you lean to the left, you should wonder as to how the news outlets that you trust could become as corrupt as the Times; if it could happen at that prestigious and well-respected company, it could – and probably has – happened at others.
If you lean to the right, you should do two things. First, ask yourself if what has happened at the Times could happen at your preferred news sources. Second, hold those same companies accountable; honestly evaluate the stories they report; make sure they aren’t just tickling your ears.
Weiss’s experience, I suspect, is not abnormal. In fact, I believe that it’s altogether common (which I assert cautiously and with much melancholy). But there is hope for the future, which Weiss herself articulates:
“For these young writers and editors, there is one consolation. As places like The Times and other once-great journalistic institutions betray their standards and lose sight of their principles, Americans still hunger for news that is accurate, opinions that are vital, and debate that is sincere.”
The way to right this journalistic ship is to demand truth telling and to require honesty from those to whom we listen. Though the New York Times may be too far gone (though I hope it’s not), the truth isn’t. We just have to discover where it’s being told.