Wednesday, July 15, 2020

Bari Weiss Case Shows What's Wrong With 'Woke' Media

By Ralph Cipriano

When editor/writer Bari Weiss aired her grievances yesterday with the publisher of The New York Times in her now-famous letter of resignation, she laid out most of the problems with the entire 'woke' Progressive media, all of which ring true for The Philadelphia Inquirer.

When Weiss joined the Times three years ago, she wrote that she had hoped to be part of "the free exchange of ideas in a democratic society." But instead, she learned that "a new consensus has emerged in the press . . . that truth isn't a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job it is to inform everyone else."

Weiss wrote about Twitter being the "ultimate editor" of the Times, and said that "stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions."

Instead of writing the first draft of history, as journalists once aspired to do, Weiss complained, "now history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative."

All of which is true about the Inquirer.

Let's look at today's online version of the Inquirer to see "the narrowest of audiences" that the newspaper seeks to satisfy with stories that fit their narrow version of reality. 

As you can see, racism lurks around every corner. Check out these headlines and some of the lead paragraphs from just one day's batch of stories:

-- "Seventy percent of Superfund sites are within a mile of public housing, report finds."

 "'Environmental racism has played a central role in this devotion,' " the report's authors wrote. 'Laws and policies have put Black and Brown communities in direct proximity to environmental toxins.' "

-- "George Floyd family set to announce a lawsuit against Minneapolis."

-- "A shootout with an undercover Philly cop put her in prison at 18. Now she runs a record label for current and former inmates."

"I'm here to make people as uncomfortable as possible," said BL Shirelle.

-- "Burlington County plans to drop Freeholder title; pending legislation would make it mandatory."

"Continuing our work to end systemic racism must be everyone's objective and eliminating an antiquated title from an era when slavery and racism [were] tolerated is one step we can take right away," Director Felicia Hopson said in a statement."

-- "Diversity job openings fell nearly 60 percent after the coronavirus hit. Then came the Black Lives Matter protests."

-- "As a Black student at Haveford College, I know what racism looks like at 'liberal' institutions."

-- "Teen with ties to Will Smith is raising our racial consciousness, one T-shirt at a time."

-- "Housing encampment on Parkway ties Black Lives Matter to housing."

This is the steady diet of Progressive ideology that the Inquirer is feeding its readers. For most of these 'woke' warriors, the plague of racism begins every day when they go in the bathroom, squeeze a tube of toothpaste, and see white.

My favorite example of the Inky orthodoxy -- a June 17th column from intellectual drill sergeant Elizabeth Wellington. The headline "Systemic racism has affected all of us. Here's how to start unlearning its harmful lessons."

This shrill, humorless column was filled with helpful lessons on how to unlearn systemic racism, according to Wellington the oracle. She also printed lessons to recognize, and probably memorize, written in bold print, such as "Racism is an act, not a state," and "The effects of slavery continue." 

In her marching orders for an enlightened new society, Wellington told us we must all unlearn the belief that "Color doesn't matter" and that "There is only one race: the human race." 

All harmful thoughts according to Wellington the ideologue. In its place, we must now all recognize as a superseding, prevailing truth that "Black experiences are valid."

I guess Martin Luther King's dream about having his children judged not "by the color of their skin but by the content of their character" is officially dead, according to Wellington. And she's now telling us not only how to think, but what to think. 

Why would anyone read this garbage, much less take it seriously? 

Under Wellington's ridiculous column, in the comments section, I couldn't resist posting a quote from economist Thomas Sowell, who happens to be Black:

[The Inky has a bold new 'woke' policy of capitalizing Black and Brown when it comes to race, but white, you guessed it, is still lower case.]

Systemic racism "really has no meaning that can be specified and tested in any way that one tests hypotheses," Sowell wrote. But according to Wellington and her Inky bandmates, it's all settled science.

In her resignation letter, Weiss talked about the cowardice of her publisher and her editors, who praised her in private for her courage, but failed to defend her publicly when colleagues called her a Nazi, a racist, a liar and a bigot. Her sin: publishing diverse viewpoints on the Op-Ed page, which was what that page was created to do.

"The truth is that intellectual curiosity -- let alone risk-taking -- is now a liability at the Times," she wrote. "Op-eds that would have been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired." 

And if an editor persists in getting a story published "that does not explicitly promote progressive causes," Weiss wrote, every line in the story must be "carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated."

This is my exact experience whenever I write for an outside publication. And I wind up facing layers of editors and the inevitable fact-checkers, who spend hours questioning every word.

Everyone is on edge for fear of setting off the Independent Thought Alarm. Or worse, inciting the Twitter lynch mob, or as Weiss described it, "the digital thunder dome."

Censorship is everywhere, and every story has to fit a familiar mold. Everyone must be 'woke' every minute of the day, or they risk being branded a heretic.

As a result of rampant fear, cowardice, and widespread group-think, "The paper of record, is more and more, the record of those living in a distant galaxy, one whose concerns are profoundly removed from the lives of most people," Weiss wrote. She could have been talking about Philadelphia's paper of record, as well as New York's.

In her resignation letter, Weiss revealed that many colleagues who were too afraid to defend her publicly sent her private notes decrying the "new McCarthyism" that has now "taken root at the paper of record."

In every newsroom, cowardice abounds. And the thought police are everywhere.

In a story about Weiss's resignation, former NYT staffer Judith Miller talked about the paper's new "red flag" system which "effectively enables even junior editors to "stop or deny the publication of an article containing a controversial view or position."

The Inquirer has taken this red flag system one step further. In their bold new plan to dismantle "systemic racism in our coverage and our culture," which I outed last week, the Inquirer has proposed "creating a process for flagging sensitive content" that would presumably be available to any staff member. How's that for self-censorship?

Frankly, the Inquirer can't be trusted in anything they report, because, like the Times, they're writing for the narrowest of audiences, and they don't have a problem with tailoring the facts to fit a preconceived narrative.

For a textbook example of this, I refer you to a blog post I wrote on April 3rd, under the headline, "What a social justice reporter left out of her inspiring story."

In that post, I examined a story written by Samantha Melamed, the Inquirer's official "social justice" reporter, about the case of Cynthia Alvarado, a 27-year-old Philly mom who worked as a dancer at a gentleman's club. 

A jury sent Alvarado to prison for life without parole in 2010 for her involvement in the murder of another woman. Thanks to the efforts of District Attorney Larry Krasner, a crusading Villanova sociology professor, and a bunch of idealistic law students, Alvarado was sprung from jail earlier this year, without having to endure any due process.

In her story that ran March 30th in the Inquirer, Melamed left out all the tawdry details of the murder, which cost another woman of color her life. Melamed also covered up D.A. Krasner's actions in the case, which involved abandoning a prosecutor's traditional role and taking a couple of legal dives in court.

But nothing's too low for our bottom feeder of a D.A. whom Melamed and her mates are always covering for, because they share the same Progressive ideology. Meanwhile, Melamed also failed to divulge the true details of Alvarado's plea bargain, readily available in court records.

In writing her sanitized but uplifting story of a woman of color unjustly accused but finally freed by crusading social justice warriors, Melamed committed a crime against journalism by draining the story of all of its color, violence and passion. 

She did it by not mentioning the true facts of the case, which included an illicit romance, heavy drug use, and startling evidence that Alvarado, who had her own rap sheet before the murder, may not have been the greatest mom. 

How on earth do you write a story about Alvarado's case and not mention her occupation as a dancer, her habit of taking along her one-year old daughter in a car seat on drug buys, and her use of colorful language such as, "This is why he fucks me. Because I'm a ride or die bitch."

Why would you dress a stripper up in a nun's habit? Because you're a social justice warrior out on a mission, so you have to sanitize, scrub and censor to deliver an uplifting story that fits preconceived notions.

In her resignation letter, Weiss outlined three rules of survival for "independent-minded young writers and editors" trying to survive today's newsrooms, which are packed with sheep and herds of grazing sacred cows.

Rule One -- "Speak your mind at your own peril," Weiss wrote.

Rule Two -- "Never risk commissioning a story that goes against the narrative."

And finally, Rule Three, which I wish somebody had told me about before I got fired by the Inquirer:

"Never believe an editor or publisher who urges you to go against the grain," Weiss wrote. "Eventually the publisher will cave to the mob, the editor will get fired or reassigned, and you'll be hung out to dry."


  1. After reading the Thought Provoking Letter of Resignation to the NY Slimes{sic intended} that Ms. Weiss penned and had widely circulated Yesterday, we should remember that the Times was once a defender of the 3rd Reich in the Infancy of Fascism in Europe and was supported by the Sulzberger Family of self hating Jewish Elitists.

    Bari Weiss, has made many appearances on Bill Maher's Hateful Program and has teamed up with the other self described Radical Queer, Andrew Sullivan in their Campaign to pit their slanted World View versus cherished Old Western Values, while arguing that all who disagree are Anti-Semitic and this Return to Liberal Fascism is an attempt to redress a Long Held History of Support for Contrived Causes and Crimes against Humanity.

    Another successful rabid vermin and PR Nanipulator, the Truthslayer Ben Waxman, who can serve as Political Thought Gestapo for the likes of a Gutter Snipe DA Larfy Krasner who manage to ruin lives with great zeal and aplomb and survive as A. Waxman, Goebbels PR Agency.

    1. A fine, fine article. And a great post here.

  2. The national conversation needs to include journalists who blindly follow the lead of prosecutors in condemning fellow citizens. I ask how it is ethical or legal to take damaging information from any source and proclaim it to be true. No one is holding up a defendant's truth for the public to digest, we are subjected to a relentless barrage of false or misleading facts, usually planted by a prosecutor to gain the desired outcome, such as a defendant pleading guilty.

    I ask also if journalists believe everything that comes from a government official, no matter how lofty a position that source may hold, the info can be invented and highly unlikely. It has always been my understanding that journalists would question a source or question how that official arrived at those findings. Except when it comes to prosecutors, they are never questioned, never held accountable and defendants are paying the price for complacency. Prosecutors have nothing to lose and everything to gain from manipulating and compromising the media. If the police have a do not call list prosecutors should be no different.

    It is acceptable in our country to condemn someone in the court of public opinion with one set of facts from prosecutors who benefit from a conviction. Something has been lost in the translation, a journalist should be held accountable for damaging a defendant's entire life with only the facts from self-serving prosecutors. Defendants are unable to defend themselves when people from respected media outlets tell the region that an individual is guilty, there is no way back.

    Journalists are aiding and abetting prosecutors in their quest for an indictment and a conviction. Defense attorneys should also tell journalists and juries that a prosecutor has lied in court before, that they have lied to a grand jury, and that they have a poor reputation among others in their profession for their prior actions. Defense attorneys also need to make it known to the public when an FBI agent lies for the prosecution, forget the government got it wrong speech, it needs to be changed to the government lied. As it stands now the media has the prosecution backs, nothing to fear from a journalist being in the courtroom. It should matter to a journalist that they were responsible for denying a defendant a fair trial and were party to violating their civil rights by having broadcasted dangerous and damaging fallacies to potential jurors.

    1. The Traffic Court Sorrows and Saga Continues.

      Vince Fumo could underwrite a National Best Seller, far beyond the Tales described in the Senator, penned by the Intrepid Journalist and Author of this Great Site.

      Vince was the Prime Architect of the PPA, and understood the most detailed and defined Workings of Traffic Court as it evolved from its beginnings in the Magistrate System.

      Jim Kenney wanted the PPA to expand its Authority to oversee and control other Public Utilities that would have included PGW, which was another Brilliant Fumo Program.

      It is an amazing Tribute to the Senator that he continues to protect the System and the Players and Strategies that he was responsible for, to include the Political Masterpiece of the Gambling Control Order, which circumvented a Voters Referendum and he has not chosen to disclose, but rather to deflect on the Failed Fool Kenney who he fostered and who exists as a living stain on Fumo's and his Father's Legacy.

  3. As this Period of Cultural and Political Revolution unfolds, Iconic Sports Franchises such as the NFL Washington REDSKINS face the onslaught of the Tyrannical Mob.

    If they can't tear down the Washington Monument, why not take down the Football Team in the interim.

    BLM and the Radical Lesbians now have marched onto the Playing Fields to champion the Cheerleaders who have flaunted and marketed their wares in Stadiums when not working the Gentlemen Clubs where they were scouted and recruited.

    So now Jeff Bezos will advance his Legions of Intrepid Reporters to save America from the Abuses of Sexploitation and force not just a name change but a hostile takeover of the Franchise fueled with the as yet still unchallenged Power of the Washington Post.

    The Sneaky Bastards hide behind the Protection of the 1st Ammendment to inflict Treachery and Tyranny, but the Day of Reckoning is close at hand.

    When will the Public finally recognize that a Billionaire Publisher and Treacherous Venture Capitalist, is a Partner with Our Most Dedicated Enemies, and may not only seek ownership of any and all entities within his reach, but be the conniving evil and predatory force that has given this Country the Leadership Sloths and Ogres like de Blasio, Kenney, Krasner and Worst of all Obama/Biden.

  4. When did hatred become our number one controlling emotion in this country, when did it become acceptable to hate everyone and wish them all ill will?

    When did the powerful decide they were able to ruin lives and make it impossible to fight back. When did wanting to win override being fair and honest and just?

    What is America teaching its people, what is it teaching the world? When did we start discarding fellow citizens by shaming and maligning them?

    I am so disappointed in my country, I am disappointed in its leadership and the the powerful who take away civil liberties of innocents.

    Above all I am disappointed in the media for creating much of the hatred used to justify such hatred, making it part of our fabric to despise one another.

    The justice department taught me that being powerful and winning is more important than the truth. The media taught me that is perfectly acceptable to discard human beings in order to grab headlines.
    No one really counts, no one has worth, no one is valuable. Life is cheap in America.

    I am relearning the values of America, values I never knew existed, in order to survive,you must put ones self first about all else, winning is a must, truth does not matter. I don't think the meek with inherit the earth and time soon, well not in American anyway.

  5. I answered Ms. Weiss' concerns in the best way I know how: by canceling my subscription.


Thoughtful commentary welcome. Trolling, harassing, and defaming not welcome. Consistent with 47 U.S.C. 230, we have the right to delete without warning any comments we believe are obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.