Another resignation from the LA Times
-
A guy who wrote some editorials there is resigning. The obvious question is, why would someone deplatform themselves, rather than stay and write editorials about how evil their platform is? He responds to that, late in his resignation note on his Substack:
https://harrylitman.substack.com/p/why-i-just-resigned-from-the-los
I don’t pretend that my resignation is any kind of serious counter-blow to the damage of Soon-Shiong’s cozying up to Trump. And I see, and I thought about, the argument that my most constructive role would be to stay on and continue to use my one voice as forcefully as I could to explain to Times readers the grave dangers on the horizon.
But the cost of alliance with an important national institution that has such an important role to play in pushing back against authoritarian rule, but declines to do so for spurious and selfish reasons, feels too great. And Soon-Shiong’s conscious pattern of détente with Trump has in fact recast the paper’s core identity to one of appeasement with an authoritarian madman. I am loath to affiliate with that identity in any way.
My growing misgivings about the Times are one of the reasons I started this Substack two weeks ago. I’ve been blown away by the response and the number of followers and subscribers in just the first two weeks: thank you to everyone. Having this outlet for my thoughts about where Trump 2.0 is taking us makes it easier to leave.
So he refuses to do the right thing, stay, and fight the good fight with the most powerful weapon at his disposal, which is his platform at the LA Times. Because he's afraid of reputational damage in the eyes of people too stupid to understand why he's there. Meanwhile, his main complaint against the LA Times is that they are refusing to do the right thing, and capitulating to the stupid masses. Sure would be nice if the TDS set was more self-aware. I'd like to take them more seriously.
