Monday, June 04, 2018

The Brooks-Sailer boundary


How the Deciders decide what you should read:

This explains why David Brooks writes for the New York Times and Steve Sailer does not

William Rusher to William F. Buckley:

I recently read somewhere a little homily to the effect that if a person makes us think we're thinking, we love him; but if he he makes us think, we hate him. Take your choice-- and then make up your mind to take the consequences.

Why the Times editors like David Brooks:

In 2003, Brooks got a call from New York Times editorial-page editor Gail Collins inviting him to lunch. Collins was looking for a conservative to replace outgoing columnist William Safire, but one who understood how liberals think. “I was looking for the kind of conservative writer that wouldn’t make our readers shriek and throw the paper out the window,” says Collins. “He was perfect.”

2 comments:

Chris said...

But this doesn't apply at the other edge? Because the whole frame of acceptable opinion creeps left, while conservatives like to have people more conservative behind them, the next ones to be tripped up, progressives can happily go as far as they can up to the proceeding edge

craig said...

Yes. Since the Left is less scary to the editorial monoculture than is the Right, the stance of the paper will inevitably drift Left.