Tom Scocca@tomscocca.bsky.social |
One editor persistently asking "Did that happen, though?" would leave the Wall Street Journal opinion section a clean soothing expanse of blank paper
14 replies 217 reposts 1186 likes
Tom Scocca@tomscocca.bsky.social |
One editor persistently asking "Did that happen, though?" would leave the Wall Street Journal opinion section a clean soothing expanse of blank paper
14 replies 217 reposts 1186 likes
Mario
@dmario.bsky.social
[ View ] |
I agree with you 100%.
But there's actually a pretty famous recent example they could have used! An entire DA race run on prosecuting Bill Cosby.
whyy.org/articles/aft...
The losing "I won't prosecute" candidate later served on Trump's legal team for a while.
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
Ozma
@rowyourbot.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Noah whathisface…Noah Smith says it happened in his substack. But it didn’t happen, did it?
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
Jo_clever_ke
@insidejoke.bsky.social
[ View ] |
They have to say Prosecutor specifically in the hypothetical, which they intend to be misread as a factual, because otherwise it would be calling out Trump.
1 replies 1 reposts 18 likes
McGuffin
@hitchkitty.bsky.social
[ View ] |
See also "cool story, bro".
0 replies 0 reposts 0 likes
Andrew Jackson Lynch
@whatsforlynch.bsky.social
[ View ] |
You can tell it didn't happen, because it wouldn't be necessary to do that cutesy "Mr. X" nonsense if it had.
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
Madness Table
@rollforphobia.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Enforcing laws that only the wealthy even have the option to break is discriminatory. WSJ call me.
0 replies 0 reposts 7 likes
Ni en pedo
@300ps.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Dude don't ruin our Vibes section
0 replies 0 reposts 3 likes
Benny Six Cats
@teeveeben.bsky.social
[ View ] |
What if every time Peggy Noon invents a New Yorker she kayfabe met on the subway or at a deli, in some distant universe, that imaginary figment is made manifest. A whole multiversal NYC, populated by millions of living fake anecdotes where Noonan is their oblivious and ambivalent god-creator.
0 replies 0 reposts 5 likes
Nick S
@holgate.permanent.red
[ View ] |
The purpose of the WSJ opinion section is to be always wrong so that if you ever find yourself agreeing with it you know that your thinking took a bad turn.
0 replies 0 reposts 1 likes
Wudang96 💜🌻
@wudang96.bsky.social
[ View ] |
"Hypothetically of course* has to be removed from acceptable rationale for publishing and promoting lies. Great classroom exercise and a really good strategy for promoting disinformation.
0 replies 0 reposts 4 likes
ProzacElf
@prozacelf.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Well I mean who wants to deal with a defamation suit from Professor X? Obviously you have to blame the anonymous Mr X
1 replies 0 reposts 2 likes
Joe Gannon
@jmgannon.bsky.social
[ View ] |
1 replies 1 reposts 3 likes
onekade
@onekade.bsky.social
[ View ] |
The WSJ opinion page loves it when prosecutors run on a promise to lock up more poor people for doing poor people crimes.
0 replies 0 reposts 10 likes
jody
@jodyshenn.bsky.social
[ View ] |
Technically, many of them are editors, so they could ask, get “probably” and then just go ahead and print. They probably do stuff like that all the time.
1 replies 0 reposts 1 likes