On the Peterson/Newman interview and broadcaster bias
Ten days ago I posted an interview of Canadian academic Jordan Peterson by Cathy Newman, which had ruffled a few feathers.
I put this up in a post "On Heresy and Censorship" to illustrate where he stands, because a junior Canadian academic had been made the subject of disciplinary procedures for showing a class a short video clip of Jordan Peterson (procedures which, if the press report about them to which I linked was remotely accurate, appeared troubling in what they say about the state of free speech and thought in the University concerned.)
This interview sparked a strong reaction and also, unfortunately. a lot of over-the-top trolling attacks on both participants.
I personally think some of the reaction to the interview is overstated - for example. some of those who have been attacking Peterson appear to think he actually said things which Newman asked him if he was saying and which he disavowed. Similarly a lot of the flak which has been aimed at Cathy Newman appears to be for doing her job - an interviewer is supposed to pin the interviewee down on what he or she is actually saying and that can reasonably include seeking to clarify whether any of the statements they have made is really a "dog whistle" for a more controversial position.
Nevertheless those people commenting on this interview who suggested that Cathy Newman repeatedly and frequently asked Peterson whether he was saying things which he clearly had not said do, in my humble opinion, have a point.
Newman's apparent difficulty in understanding what Petersen was actually saying was also illustrative of a trap which all of us need to watch out for - to be too ready to label unfamiliar views or people coming from a direction to which we are unsympathetic and attach to them a package of prior assumptions about what we think they "really" stand for which may be far from the whole truth. The political left is particularly bad at doing this to the political right, but it is a trap which everyone needs to watch out for.
Here is the interview again - see what you think. (It lasts half an hour but you don't have to share all of Jordan Peterson's views to find it interesting.)
There have been suggestions that the fallout from this interview is, quote "forcing broadcast journalists to reconsider their interview techniques and inherent biases," most recently in a City AM article by Ryan Bourne from which I took today's "Quote of the Day."
I hope Bourne is right about that: some of our broadcasters could do with a willingness to consider a wider range of views more seriously.
I put this up in a post "On Heresy and Censorship" to illustrate where he stands, because a junior Canadian academic had been made the subject of disciplinary procedures for showing a class a short video clip of Jordan Peterson (procedures which, if the press report about them to which I linked was remotely accurate, appeared troubling in what they say about the state of free speech and thought in the University concerned.)
This interview sparked a strong reaction and also, unfortunately. a lot of over-the-top trolling attacks on both participants.
I personally think some of the reaction to the interview is overstated - for example. some of those who have been attacking Peterson appear to think he actually said things which Newman asked him if he was saying and which he disavowed. Similarly a lot of the flak which has been aimed at Cathy Newman appears to be for doing her job - an interviewer is supposed to pin the interviewee down on what he or she is actually saying and that can reasonably include seeking to clarify whether any of the statements they have made is really a "dog whistle" for a more controversial position.
Nevertheless those people commenting on this interview who suggested that Cathy Newman repeatedly and frequently asked Peterson whether he was saying things which he clearly had not said do, in my humble opinion, have a point.
Newman's apparent difficulty in understanding what Petersen was actually saying was also illustrative of a trap which all of us need to watch out for - to be too ready to label unfamiliar views or people coming from a direction to which we are unsympathetic and attach to them a package of prior assumptions about what we think they "really" stand for which may be far from the whole truth. The political left is particularly bad at doing this to the political right, but it is a trap which everyone needs to watch out for.
Here is the interview again - see what you think. (It lasts half an hour but you don't have to share all of Jordan Peterson's views to find it interesting.)
There have been suggestions that the fallout from this interview is, quote "forcing broadcast journalists to reconsider their interview techniques and inherent biases," most recently in a City AM article by Ryan Bourne from which I took today's "Quote of the Day."
I hope Bourne is right about that: some of our broadcasters could do with a willingness to consider a wider range of views more seriously.
Comments