[FRIAM] credibility

[uǝlƃ ☣]

These articles:

  New York Times under fire over op-ed urging Trump to 'send in the troops'
  https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/03/new-york-times-op-ed-tom-cotton-backlash-staff

  Senator’s ‘Send In the Troops’ Op-Ed in The Times Draws Online Ire
  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/business/tom-cotton-op-ed.html?searchResultPosition=1

remind me of EricS' (proper) calling out of Dave's bullshit about Science™, Jochen's calling out of Weinstein's (apparent) narcissism, this act of feminist community policing by a co-feminist:

  Why Naomi Wolf Needs to Go Away Forever
  https://youtu.be/GrVS_c9xoGs

deplatforming, how to handle trolls, sophistry surrounding metaphor, the irresponsibility of aphorisms, pithy snark, cherry picking, as well as steelmanning and listening with empathy. The unifying thread, I think, is that "words have power" and the failure to mitigate the consequences/implications of one's words is negligent. Credibility does NOT come from having experiences (e.g. 200k hours on a bike), reputation (a degree from XYZ), intelligence (knowing things or high IQ), etc. Credibility comes from a historical ephemeris showing consequentialist care, evidence that one considers and mitigates the impact of what they say (and do) on the world, other people, the planet, etc. Banally, this is the simple point Tom makes about needing editors (or Watson makes about books vs. peer-review). But it pervades so much deeper into every aspect of every layer of life.

But to be clear, I don't think credibility is related to *[in]formality*. Adopting formal methods for any given behavior (like "hospitality rules" for seminars in rarified cloisters). Both formal and informal treatments can be credible. I suppose it seems like even the demonstrated choice of [in]formality and the consideration of why one or the other is appropriate establishes credibility.

Long story short, *this* is why I cancelled my subscription to the NYT back when they hired Bret Stephens [†], despite all the things they do that I like.


[†] For a little context, see: https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a28892307/david-karpf-bret-stephens-bedbug-nyt-column-response/

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ