I think it would be understandable to maintain friendships/relationship with a regular Joe who has unhinged political/social views. Because they are usually just regurgitating talking points from whatever media they are consuming. But I think it is different when you are at that elite level of setting the agenda for the conversation for …
I think it would be understandable to maintain friendships/relationship with a regular Joe who has unhinged political/social views. Because they are usually just regurgitating talking points from whatever media they are consuming. But I think it is different when you are at that elite level of setting the agenda for the conversation for so many people.
I’m not quite sure how to make my point but I just get the sense that Katie was talking about how small, low level friendships and families are being broken up by polarization etc. But I just think that is a different thing than maintaining a supportive relationship with someone at an elite media institution who is influencing such a large audience. When you at the same time are trying to influence the same audience a different way. If behind closed doors you’re personal friends then it makes you appear to be a hypocrite to me.
I think you’re conceptualizing the work of both Dreyfus and Lorenz in ways they would not. They don’t see this as a competition or their audiences as the same. I don’t think there’s much overlap in the people reading either writer’s work.
Having had more time to think about it. I think my feeling is that it is cowardly to cite your personal friendship with someone as a reason to not be critical of their work.
You can’t call yourself a media critic and then say “well I won’t say anything about one of the worst offenders of the things I critique in others because we’re personally friends”.
Probably a good thing too. We tend to frame something a friend does, assuming they're still a friend, in the best light with the best motives.
So an attempt to critique would probably fall flat anyway. Recognizing that and just opting out up front is the most professional way to approach it.
Take the closest friends, spouses. The second spouses start publicly critiquing each other's views, you know the divorce lawyers are already on speed dial.
I would love an interview with Batya, (about her first book as it would fit with the theme of this show). I know she used to guest host rising some times so maybe she could fill in on Briana Joy Gray tea too.
I think it would be understandable to maintain friendships/relationship with a regular Joe who has unhinged political/social views. Because they are usually just regurgitating talking points from whatever media they are consuming. But I think it is different when you are at that elite level of setting the agenda for the conversation for so many people.
I’m not quite sure how to make my point but I just get the sense that Katie was talking about how small, low level friendships and families are being broken up by polarization etc. But I just think that is a different thing than maintaining a supportive relationship with someone at an elite media institution who is influencing such a large audience. When you at the same time are trying to influence the same audience a different way. If behind closed doors you’re personal friends then it makes you appear to be a hypocrite to me.
I think you’re conceptualizing the work of both Dreyfus and Lorenz in ways they would not. They don’t see this as a competition or their audiences as the same. I don’t think there’s much overlap in the people reading either writer’s work.
Having had more time to think about it. I think my feeling is that it is cowardly to cite your personal friendship with someone as a reason to not be critical of their work.
You can’t call yourself a media critic and then say “well I won’t say anything about one of the worst offenders of the things I critique in others because we’re personally friends”.
Eh, people recuse themselves professionally from matters they’re personally linked to all the time.
Probably a good thing too. We tend to frame something a friend does, assuming they're still a friend, in the best light with the best motives.
So an attempt to critique would probably fall flat anyway. Recognizing that and just opting out up front is the most professional way to approach it.
Take the closest friends, spouses. The second spouses start publicly critiquing each other's views, you know the divorce lawyers are already on speed dial.
Fair. I’m just being contrarian for the sake of it I think haha
I would love an interview with Batya, (about her first book as it would fit with the theme of this show). I know she used to guest host rising some times so maybe she could fill in on Briana Joy Gray tea too.