Weiss’ column on Rogan avoids examining the truly interesting question that Rogan himself raises about the surreal commercial logic that now dominates news and entertainment media. Peretz reveals that “she’s been known to do something amazing-change her mind.” Traditional journalism considered it a virtue to research a subject before having to retract any unfounded assertions. In 2019, Evgenia Peretz wrote a dithyrambic profile of the columnist for Vanity Fair in which she explained the “almost positive” side of Weiss’ propension to make irresponsible statements and then retreat. Weiss simply needs to feel “pretty positive” about the personal opinion she wants readers to adopt and then launch it assertively, hoping others will follow without asking the embarrassing questions Rogan did. Suddenly unsure of herself, she backtracked and said, “maybe I’m wrong,” but then doubled back with “I don’t think I’m wrong.” A bit later, she asked, “Am I crazy?” and then returned to claiming to be “almost positive.” Totally at sea, Weiss finally proposed a kind of truce: “I can come back on when I know more about this.” Better than anything else, this reveals how she approaches her writing for The Times as well. Then, Weiss threw out the kind of unfounded pronouncements that qualify her to be a Times opinion writer when she called Gabbard “the motherlode of bad ideas.” When challenged again, she protested, “I’m pretty positive about that.” Some might object that there are no degrees of positiveness. Rogan then asked Weiss what Gabbard said “that qualifies her” to be called a “toadie.” Weiss replied, “I don’t remember the details,” avoiding admitting that there were none. JQuery('.search-field').on('input', function() )
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |