Digest 9/13/2021

Twitter is the worst thing that's ever happened to journalism and to journalists - what would it look like if we could stop using it? Also, a deeper look into the Guardian's hasty redaction of Judith Butler's thoughts on TERFs.

CAN MEDIA EXIST WITHOUT TWITTER?

There’s a sentence my family, friends, and therapist are likely uniquely tired of hearing: “I wish I could delete Twitter but I need it for my job.” Almost 100% of my mental health issues have stemmed from the conversations and behaviors that take place on that website, and the fact that I still, without fail, type the URL into my browser every weekday morning feels like pressing my hand directly onto the base of a hot sauce pan and complaining that it hurts. Just stop. Just stop!

Of course, you and I reading this know it’s not that easy. All the editors are on Twitter, all the writers, all the calls for pitches, all the job announcements, all the articles that everyone writes, ever, that’s where they go. The weird thing is, though, it’s not like journalism is a subculture on Twitter. It’s pretty much the culture.

“Very little of the American population is on Twitter,” declares a recent You’re Wrong About episode about cancel culture. “It’s only one in five Americans who have a Twitter account, and of those, the median user sends two tweets a month.”

In fact, co-host Michael Hobbes cites a study that claims that 80% of the tweets are sent by 10% of the users, which somehow makes up “the vast percentage of the American journalism apparatus.”

In other words, Twitter is a hell of our own making. We’re the ones responsible for propping it up, which means we could just as easily decide to change it. After yet another therapy session talking about how, unfortunately, I can’t and won’t stop doing the thing that’s directly responsible for my unhappiness, I wondered what that could look like.

The only reason Twitter matters to our jobs is because of the significance our industry has granted it, and not necessarily correctly. Of the handful of websites I’ve worked at over the years, Twitter has never been a significant driver of clicks. Yet, it’s only the most successful writers—your Jia Tolentinos, your Lindy Wests—who have been able to stop using it and still have a public-facing writing career. On the whole, to be a writer who doesn’t use Twitter is still very much an exception to the rule.

A large portion of my peers in journalism would agree that they wish they didn’t have to be on it. Many of us talk wistfully about one day getting a job outside of media that means we never have to open the app again. And as much as I want to be the first domino, maintaining a freelance writing career while never using Twitter in hopes that others will follow suit and a healthier information-sharing medium will appear, I worry I’m sabotaging any future career opportunities—even if not doing so means sabotaging my mental health instead.

---

GUARDIAN BOWS TO ANTI-TRANS PRESSURE ON JUDITH BUTLER INTERVIEW, SCREWS OVER FREELANCER 

On Tuesday, The Guardian published and then heavily redacted a portion of an interview with gender theorist Judith Butler (the redacted portion can be read here). In response to a question asked by writer Jules Gleeson, Butler referred to the ideology of TERFs (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists) as “one of the dominant strains of fascism in our times.” However, Gleeson’s question, along with Butler’s unabashed answer, were swiftly removed from the piece mere hours after publication, with the Guardian leaving only this note at the foot of the article:

“This article was edited on 7 September 2021 to reflect developments which occurred after the interview took place.”

Naturally, the one thing the outlet could have done to ensure as many eyes as possible on the quote was remove it surreptitiously and without clear reason. However, the decision has left Gleeson, a freelancer, feeling frustrated and “exposed” to abuse.

Gleeson says the publication “folded” to online bigots in their decision to remove both the question and answer from the piece, and that this pressure was put on the US Guardian site by the UK site, which has openly published transphobic content in the past. Gleeson had even written about the Guardian’s transphobia back in 2018, and tells Study Hall over Twitter DM that she only agreed to write this piece if it was for The Guardian US.

“I was always expecting this to be basically a one-off, realistically, although not one that ended this frustratingly,” she says.

As a freelancer, Gleeson was put in a particularly powerless position when it came to the conversation following the interview’s publication. She says the piece was published at 3pm, and that she received the first email about the backlash between 5pm and 6pm. The decision, which Gleeson heavily fought as best she could, was apparently made by 8:30pm.

“This was a nasty surprise and not really something I was prepared for (I had a film night with some friends arranged),” she says. “I could have made myself fully available if I’d known they were going to do a post hoc redaction, but I guess nobody was expecting it.”

While online backlash was a factor, another key part of the decision to remove the question came from Gleeson’s mention of a viral incident at Wi Spa in Los Angeles over the summer when a woman claimed she saw someone’s penis in what was labeled as a “women-only” area of the spa. This sparked anti-trans protests that drew the Proud Boys’ presence. Last week, the offender was arrested for indecent exposure. A lot of the details are still murky, including the gender identity of the person in custody, which Gleeson says “took Wi Spa from a weak example to a counter-productive one.” However, Gleeson offered an alternative question after the details came to light, and maintains that it was not necessary to remove Butler’s entire answer.

In a statement to Study Hall, the Guardian says, “We have not censored Judith Butler but addressed a failure in our editorial standards. This particular question omitted the new details that had come to light, and therefore risked misleading our readers. For that reason we decided to remove both the question and Judith Butler’s answer.”

While Butler’s quote was always going to be a lightning rod, the actions of the Guardian only served to put Gleeson herself in the line of fire, something she tried to impress upon her editors.

“I’ve now had fringe publications posting unflattering fiveyear-old photos of me, cracking jokes about my genitals (I’m intersex), and more,” she says. “The internet trolling I’ve mostly just been ignoring, and thankfully these are mostly accounts with 100-10K followers, unlike it used to be. Nevertheless, this is a lot of stress to handle.”

---

COMINGS AND GOINGS

— Meghan McCain, who I’m sure is a Study Hall subscriber, is now a Daily Mail columnist.

— Natalie Escobar has jumped from NPR’s Code Switch to the culture desk for the next six months.

— Annie Armstrong is starting at Artnet as the new Wet Paint columnist.

— Kristal Dixon, Emma Hurt, and Thomas Wheatley are joining Axios to co-author the Axios Atlanta newsletter, launching this month.

— Kristen Radtke joins The Verge as art director (and is open to pitches!)

— Evette Dionne, after three years at Bitch Media, is headed to editorial at Netflix.

---

EVERYTHING ELSE

— Vox Media has made another acquisition, this time of writer Nicholas Quah’s newsletter Hot Pod, which covers the podcast industry. Hot Pod is now part of The Verge, with Verge writer Ashley Carman taking over from Quah, and Quah moving to Vulture as a full-time podcast critic where he’ll publish another newsletter, 1.5x Speed, filled with weekly recommendations. For all the talk of the newsletter boom, Quah’s move to Vulture and Hot Pod’s new life on The Verge may be a glimpse of what “next” looks like for the industry trend.

— JPMorgan is buying The Infatuation????

— Sydney Leathers tweeted about confronting Ben Smith over “outing” her during Anthony Weiner’s 2013 sexting scandal.

— Brooks Barnes, Hollywood reporter for the New York Times, shared a glimpse into how celebrity sightings now work in a Deux Moi world. A restaurant PR firm provided meticulous detail about actor Ben Stiller’s trip to L’Avenue at Saks, down to the speed with which he and his party ate (“slow”) and the amount he tipped ($150 on a $160 check). Looks like Ben Stiller wasn’t briefed on the new PR strategy.

— Florida Times-Union writer Beth Reese Cravey revealed in an open plea to Gannett, the outlet’s parent company, regarding the Florida Times-Union Guild wage proposal, that her salary is still only a shocking $41,982 after 40 years at the company.

— A shocking (to me, at least) tidbit from writer Haley Nahman’s recent newsletter regarding her time as an influencer while working for Man Repeller: “a portion of all influencer earnings had to be paid out to the company.”

— Both New Gawker and Defector had parties last week and I wasn’t invited to either.