(no subject)

[novapsyche]

Slate defends Forbes' "career women" article.

I generally like Slate's viewpoint, but I may have to, as one person at Feministe said, consider Slate "dead to me." Especially as Jack Shafer is Slate's "editor at large."

Comments

[brendand.livejournal.com]

Let's throw out the baby to spite the bath water.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

You didn't even read the article.

[brendand.livejournal.com]

I have now read the Slate article and the Feministe Blog. I don't know that it's necessary to read the Forbes article.

In any case, I stand by what I said. Why stop reading Slate entirely because you disagree with one article written by one person. I can understand getting upset and stopping reading a certain person's blog, if you're absolutely outraged by what that individual said. But why stop reading Slate entirely when it's written by several different people, many of whose opinions you happen to agree with?

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

Because the executive editor influences the entire tone of the magazine. He speaks for the magazine.

It's not enough to read the Slate article, because that wasn't as inflammatory as the Forbes article (which received so many complaints that they took it down, then moved it). I don't see why you don't understand that it's important to go to the source and judge for yourself, instead of presuming what the article might be about.

[brendand.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying that I shouldn't judge the Forbes article based on the Forbes article. But then, I'm not talking about the Forbes article. I'm talking about the Slate article.

And since the we're talking about the Slate article, I think it's best to judge it based on the SLATE article. And I'm also not DEFENDING the Slate article. I'm saying that I don't think it's a good idea for one to stop reading it based on disagreeing with one article. If you agreed with most of the other (Slate) articles, that were edited by this person, what has changed that you're suddenly going to start disagreeing with all of them?

Beyond that, since when is it not a good idea to read things that you disagree with? How better to know how to counter their arguments than to be familiar with their arguments.

[dionysus1999.livejournal.com]

I'm going to back B up here. If you stopped reading anything that you disagreed with, you'd be like our current president, who's spoon fed the news to keep from upsetting him.

I know that's not what you mean, anyway, since I know you read conservative commentators whom you disagree with.

I think you could definitely read Slate with the attitude that the editor isn't the sharpest tack when it comes to women's issues, though. I think S could do that job, maybe we should make her send them her resume.

[brendand.livejournal.com]

Thank you.