First, I want to commend The FP for consistently delivering some of the most insightful work, thoughtful conversations, and spirited debates in journalism today. That said, I feel compelled to respond to this episode—something I’ve never done.
Batya’s commentary was so disconnected from reality that it bordered on absurdity and incoherent. She clearly lacks a fundamental understanding of how the economy functions, from supply chains, labor markets, and other key factors.
At this point, I’m genuinely asking: Is this just part of an act, or is she actually acting as a shill for the administration? Either way, it’s disheartening to see such unserious analysis in an otherwise thoughtful publication.
I opened the comments section to say a little something about how Batya refuses to see nuance or even give in just a little - like Brianna does so many times - that some of Trump's actions might pose a challenge for working class people. She made assumption after assumption that anyone who questions Trump's approach to tariffs and revitalizing U.S. manufacturing somehow finds "working with your hands" shameful. What??? (Also, an iphone as the key luxury item example?? Please. Even very poor people have smartphones. 79% of households with an annual income of less than $30K own them. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/cell_phones/how-many-americans-own-a-smartphone.html)
Alas, it looks like I'm not the only one who found her unwillingness to have a reasoned conversation about Trump absurd. I take comfort in the fact that I have a lot of company.
Batya is completely absurd. I come to the FP to hear well reasoned opposing viewpoints, but she's a radical shill for viewpoints that make no sense, even to her I'm sure. She said as much - she's become very popular as the only voice will to support Trump's tariffs. And please spare me the advocacy for a working class America that she clearly has no personal experience with.
Batya needs to share facts as opposed to her outsized and rather superficial opinions. She does not add to the substance nor is her presentation on par with the high level of journalism at the FP.
Folks: this isn't CNN/MSNBC...we don't demand censorship when we don't like a take. It's one thing to be critical (I too thought Batya could have done better, answered the questions posed instead of reframing them, and stopped implying those who disagree with her are stupid or "elite") .... it's wholly something else to demand deplatforming, cancelation, or censorship because you don't like the take. Let's stick to the merits.... that's why we're here (and that's why many of us are subscribers...and why some of us have been since the Common Sense days).
Batya is free to go wherever else she wants to lie & avoid answering direct questions but it's TFP's job to bring on guests that align with their supposed values of journalistic integrity. That's a minimum expectation of their audience. Not inviting her back on to discuss economics isn't censorship any more than calling it censorship that literally anyone else didn't get the podcast invite to begin with.
If you don't like her take, don't listen to her. Easy peazy.
There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that she be censored is the latter. For example, you'll note my comment below...no where did I say she should be canceled. Now if the management decides they no longer want her on, that's on them. But it isn't my job to tell them how to do thiers.
"There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that she be censored is the latter. " - Lance Smith replying to my reply
How could TFP "deplatform" her? Even if they fired her and never asked her back on, she's free to go anywhere else that will hire her.
Yeah, cancel culture it's best. Been hearing that argument/justification for deplatforming demands years. It still amazes me that people still trot it out. No one buys it anymore (since we all know that this sort of censorship is chilling to honest debate - as we see the definition of what qualifies as a "firing offense" increases in a rush to the bottom - and since it doesn't work anyway as you just turn those deplatformed into martyrs). And as it pertains to outlets like the Free Press, this sort of cancel culture is what gave rise to independent media, so it would be a bit hypocritical to engage in the very tactics that failed the first time through. But yeah, you do you.
Personally, I'll stick to debating the merits instead of telling news outlets how to run their business. If they decide they want to fire Batya (or whatever) that's their call. I'm an adult and I can choose for myself who I read and who I don't. It makes absolutely no difference to me whether I agree with everyone at a news outlet or not. I choose which outlets I consume instead based on how tolerant they are of difference voices.
What are you talking about? Does Batya have an unlimited right to be a podcast guest for the organization that employs her?
You're making the pushback on her appearance in this episode of
"Honestly" so much bigger than it is. She's had many opportunities to express her views without much live pushback at all. To the credit of the paying customers who expect better, wouldn't it be preferable to find someone who can better articulate a pro-Trump position without resorting to flat out lies? If there is such a person that comes on, would Batya effectively be cancelled in your view?
Batya always plays the neat little “The American people say X, so X must be true” trick. There may also be a bit of “oh, so you hate working people if you don’t believe they think X”. Ever since Destiny called her out on this on his stream I see her making these moves LITERALLY every time she speaks. It’s actually crazy that this standard for argumentation makes it onto this show. What is happening?
I don’t understand how you can feature Batya Unger Sargon on the Free Press. I do not have Trump Derangement Syndrome and agree with some of the actions that he has taken in the first 100 days, but anyone who gives him an A++ is not a serious person or was “smoking something” during the podcast. How can anyone take what she says seriously given her Trump grade. It completely diminishes all of her other opinions. By extension, it also diminishes the Free Press by having someone like her on the podcast. I will continue to be a loyal supporter of the Free Press, but certainly will not listen to her and read what she writes ever again. Hopefully, you will reconsider her role on the Free Press.
Your decision to read Batya is your own. In my comment, I was very critical of Batya and I think she did a terrible job arguing her case (calling people who disagree with you "elite" or implying they are stupid while refusing to answer the actual questions being asked isn't a good showing). But deplatforming is never the answer. That time has passed as the cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure. Instead of demanding censorship, let's stick to arguing on the merits.
“De-platforming” 🤣 As if being a paid FP contributor is every citizen’s right. There’s a difference between de-platforming and deciding to stop paying someone to do a job if they’re not doing it well. BUS has completely lost the nuance and analysis I’m relying on FP to bring to these discussions. If I want to hear someone yell about how wonderful it is to watch a POTUS pee all over the constitution because “the people” like it, there are plenty of platforms for that already. That’s not what I thought FP was about.
I am conservative and I absolutely LOVE the Free Press and the Honestly podcast. It is so valuable to hear people have opposing discussions about things they are passionate about. The greatest thing happening in todays journalism climate is all of these wonderful options. You can lean into Bari and Breonnas viewpoints but on the other hand respecting another persons voice will bring us to a place where we can reach across the aisle.
"As if being a paid FP contributor is every citizen’s right."
Yeah, that's not what that means.
"BUS has completely lost the nuance and analysis I’m relying on FP to bring to these discussions."
Then don't listen to her. Easy, peazy.
"That’s not what I thought FP was about."
You must be new here. If you wish to only hear positions that only comport with your preferred narrative, there are indeed plenty of platforms for that already (e.g. CNN and MSNBC). FP has always been about providing a forum for all positions and providing them with a proper airing. Like it or not, accept it or not by a majority of the electorate voted for Trump. Absolutely that position deserves full consideration. If you're unable to listen to that position, then no one is forcing you to listen.
That is actually what deplatforming means, Lance. It means you are removed from platforms that are seen as areas of free speech. It doesn’t mean you lose your paid job with a media outlet because you no longer bring nuance or analysis to the discussion. I actually want to hear a variety of perspectives. I’m not interested in those perspectives coming across as unserious cheerleading. I don’t want BUS to lose her role at FP because I don’t like her takes. It’s because her takes are no longer journalistic, and this is the only place on god’s green internet where real journalism still exists. I don’t want it tainted with nonsense. You’re fighting against an argument I’m not even making. I’m happy to scroll right past people I don’t like on social media all day. When I think someone is bad at a job that I’m helping to pay them to do, I state that opinion so that the people who decide how to spend my money know how I feel about it. BUS’s takes don’t bother me because I don’t agree with them (I agree with her about half the time actually). They bother me because they aren’t given with analysis and critical thinking anymore.
"That is actually what deplatforming means, Lance."
Demanding that people fire folks with whom you disagree - instead of just doing the adult thing and move on - is textbook deplatforming/cancelation and I simply don't condone it. You can have a different perspective of course, but I simply reject it wholesale.
"It’s because her takes are no longer journalistic, and this is the only place on god’s green internet where real journalism still exists. I don’t want it tainted with nonsense. "
Then don't listen to her.
There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that someone be fired isn't it.
For example, in my comment below, I was highly critical of Batya. Now the management at the FP can decide whether they wish to continue to have her take (or Batya can decide she wants to take a different approach going forward). But it isn't my job to tell the Free Press whether they should keep her around.
You’ve really helped me understand that there is a right way to be critical and a wrong way to be critical. The right way is the way you like, and the wrong way is every other way. In fact, you have spent a not insignificant amount of time arguing with a person who agrees with 95% of what you’re saying so that I can get to 100% correctness. I’ll keep working on the other five percent to earn your favor. Promise 😘
I used to enjoy Batya Unger Sargon's takes, but her inability to answer questions - and constant insinuation that the only reason people don't agree with her is because they are "elites" or stupid - really undermines her value in these discussions. I just don't find that sort of argument compelling as it's analogous to the arguments provided by the left for the last 10+ years (e.g. you're stupid/racist/sexist/etc if you don't see things just like they see it). Her weakest point was her constant diversion re:Abrego Garcia. Either she is just too high on her own supply or she simply doesn't understand the argument. The issue is not that he was deported (or that we don't want to live next to him)....the issue is HE WAS SENT TO PRISON with no due process. Regardless of whether I'd want him as a neighbor, we shouldn't be sending people to PRISON (for who knows how long) without a conviction and without an associated sentence. Makes one wonder: how many other people have been sent to prison with no conviction?
As for the ridiculous suggestion that Trump and the US is powerless to get him out of PRISON we wrongly put him in.... If El Salvador is more powerful than Trump's US, then that says far more about Trump and than it does about the Democrats flying down to visit him.
Look, I voted for Trump. I WANT him to be successful. But Bari's right: the Constitution is far more important than anything Trump is trying to do.
To all the lovers of polls and rigged by the left town halls in R districts who say "Trump's losing all his support ..." Just more fake news . ‘Never Seen This’: Frank Luntz Says It’s Unprecedented That Trump Supporters ‘Staying Firm’ Despite Economic ‘Pain’.. Truth hurts I know. Sorry - not sorry. The "I'm losing my support for Trump support" said a real Trump supporter Never!! Fake news. Fake polls. Fake disruptions at town halls. That's what the left does best. THey almost got away with it on defending Biden's mental health. However, a mentally compromised Biden would have performed much better than the word-salad person ... P.S. note to Bari - next time have 2 R's/conservatives if you are so obviously going to take the side of the leftist. Or Get a better liberal who can hold their own vs. being so aghast that their opinions are not taken as gospel.
LOL - said every leftist..... if there's one consistency: when partisans don't like what polls are telling them, they'll maintain it must be a "conspiracy" or "fake news" .... but when they like what polls are telling them, suddenly those are the "right polls." At this point, to suggest that all is well in Trump land is to keep one's head firmly placed in the sand.
As for those who wish to blindly maintain "there's nothing to see here" re: Trump's support, speaking as an independent in a big purple state who voted for Trump, I WANT the guy to be successful. But based on Trump's flippant attitude concerning due process, free speech, lawfare, and the economy, I'll very likely be voting Democrat at the midterms unless Trump can get his shit together.
It's horrifying to listen to Batya Unger Sargon laugh and say "would you want to live next to this guy?" as if that same sentiment wasn't used against Jews during WWII. Not wanting to live next to someone does not equal should be sent without due process to a foreign gulag for life in defiance of the Supreme Court. It's shocking that it goes so easily from “a man was accidentally sent there” to “it is ok” b/c as Sargon laughs, he is “a wife beater." The men in the Trump administration have been credibly accused and/or convicted of assaulting women (Hegseth, Trump, Gaetz... the list goes on) and I would not want to live next to them, but I would not send them a foreign gulag for life in defiance of the Supreme Court either.
The Free Press feels like home to lost centrists like me. I enjoy most of your content, even when I disagree. That said, it’s been hard to listen to Batya of late. She was interesting & in touch in 2024 but the world has changed and she hasn’t updated her script. It has become repetitive (and boring).
That's my take as well. Batya just doesn't have the credibility she once had: she seems a bit too high on her own supply at this point. Part of making a reasoned argument is to actually make a reasoned argument. Now she just yells at everyone who doesn't agree with her....while insinuating that everyone who doesn't see things just her way must be an "elite" or just stupid. We've heard similar language (e.g. you're a racist/sexist/etc) from the left for years and we see how that turned out. She's seriously in danger of making the same mistake. I love that Bari has someone who is so obviously pro-Trump, but Batya would be far more effective if she could thoughtfully answer the questions presented (instead of diverting, calling people names and screaming at people).
And I should note: I voted for Trump. I want the guy to be successful. But to just blindly go along with whatever Trump says isn't thoughtful commentary. Even Ben Shapiro has called Trump out when he doesn't agree with him. That's far more effective/credible.
So this debate turned out to be 2 against 1 it seems? Next time, bring on someone who doesn't spend all their time listening to their own liberal tribe and is a deer in headlights when challenged. Brianna is the poster child for the elite left - totally confounded how anyone could not agree with them/take a different position. Brianna didn't offer ONE solution. Just said Trump bad. At best when she gave tepid acknowledgement that an area was a problem (long list after Biden) her response was either A)he's not going about it the right way or B) It's impossible to thing the US can fill-in-the-blank. Biden's approval was better 1st 100 days - how did he end?
This podcast was hard to listen to. I was astonished how Ms. Ungar-Sargon was allowed to dominate the conversation, most prominently during the opening section on the economy. She ranted for at least 90% of the airtime during that segment. She was allowed to spout Trumpian nonsense without any pushback or correction. (I must say, she has taken on Trump’s style of Gish-galloping with bullshit.) You must get stronger opponent on the panel to counter her BS: David Frum would be a good choice (you even just had an excellent article on the FP from Frum; Ms. Wu, bless her, did not fill this need).
Perhaps substantial “opening statements” would help? Letting Ms. Ungar-Sargon rant on unchecked was damaging to the idea of this “debate”.
On the economy, one might ask Ms. Ungar-Sargon how bad the economic numbers would have to get before she would concede that Trump’s “plan” is a mistake? How exactly will higher prices for goods increase economic prosperity for Americans? Does she think that working-class Americans have no money in the stock market?
(Ms. Ungar-Sargon’s maniacal laughter is also extremely off-putting. She comes off as a mindless fan-girl and is very difficult to take seriously. One more “oh my gosh, are you kidding me?” will absolutely finish my respect for her.)
Ms. Ungar-Sargon’s dismissal of the lack of due process (Ms. Ungar-Sargon: Hint, due process is required in the USA under the Constitution) in the cases of the people being shipped to the El Salvadoran gulag is pathetic. Whether it’s popular with “most American voters” is irrelevant. Only “elites” care about due process in the USA? We should be governed by what Norm at the bar thinks is constitutional? Pathetic “thought” process. Ms. Ungar-Sargon, the SCOTUS has decided that Trump broke the law by denying these people due process. And due process depends on cost? If Trump doesn’t want to spend the money, then we don’t give people due process? She wants to deport people on “allegations” as she let slip. Perfect.
On the economy: Ms. Ungar-Sargon thinks 40,000 (current Dow) is “almost the same as” 45,000 (Dow in January)? (Another example of her bullshit.) If so, I have a really great bridge to sell her!
Batya turned me around—opened my eyes. Her books are AMAZING. And yet my greatest fears are that the Trump cult of personality eclipses basic issues like due process, the Constitution, free speech. The prism of what Trump does and says becomes the litmus test for what is good, rather than core values that I care about (and that underpinned Batya's books). Batya now seems to embrace the cult far more than those values. It is painful to hear her giggling and self-contradicting as she casually trashes and blithely dismisses those of us who can see plainly with our own eyes that Trump's vengeful mafia is far more invested in owning the libs and wielding power than fixing what's wrong with America.
Just chiming in - Batya used to have valuable insights. She doesn't any more and she has gone full MAGA. I think you find her amusing, Bari, but you are very seriously risking your brand by having her on. Please stop platforming her as long as she is going to say completely false and unsupportable things. I don't think I am alone in wanting to cancel my subscription (and I have been here since before it was the FP) every time I hear her.
You must be new here. This isn't CNN or MSNBC with their well-sanitized takes. "Deplatforming" isn't something we do (giving everyone a fair hearing IS the Free Press brand and it is why I continue to be a subscriber).. Keep in mind that a majority of the US population voted for Trump and ALL voters have every right to have Trump's position fairly heard/explained/etc. And that includes opinions you believe to be "completely false and unsupportable."
In my comment, I was very critical of Batya and I think she did a terrible job arguing her case (calling people who disagree with you "elite" or implying they are stupid while refusing to answer the actual questions being asked isn't a good showing). But deplatforming is never the answer. That time has passed as the cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure. Instead of demanding censorship, let's stick to arguing on the merits.
"You must be new here." Did you even read my comment? I literally explained how long I've been subscriber.
You really need to open a dictionary and learn what "majority" means. No. A "majority" of the "US population" did not vote for Trump.
Cancelling someone is not the same as not giving them a free platform to spew complete unsupported and false bullshit, which is what Batya did in this interview. She used to be a credible source. She isn't any more. The FP should be above pure propaganda, which is what Batya is at this point.
What are you afraid of? Why do you wish to silence opposing views?
Presumably you know that CNN & MSNBC exist to keep you safely ensconced in narratives that comport with your own views, right?
The Free Press isn’t - and clearly doesn’t wish to be - CNN & MSNBC.
The cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure and quite literally gave rise to Trump (and yes, Trump won the popular vote - accept it or not). It’s time to embrace adulthood and quit asking the authorities to censor people you don’t agree with.
Spoken like a true 27%'er (if you've not check the approval of Democrat party). If you don't agree with how I think then you need to be cancelled. Got it. Spoken like a true liberal who yells and screams about ending democracy and call for the end of democracy they don't like. For 4 years you defended an obviously mentally compromised Biden, thought Kamala's tackle was 'cute', not a peep about open borders, loved Trans/WOKE rights/DEI, etc.. It's called The FREE Press not the WOKE/Progressive Press ... so Freedom only works one way from you lefties it seems ...
I didn't say "cancelled." I thought the FP was above spewing pure propaganda for Trump (or Biden or anyone else) that has no actual basis. That is what Batya did in this interview. I didn't say she should be "cancelled." I said she should not disgrace this amazing platform that Bari and Nellie built with her non-factual positions (i.e. $1.5 trillion in foreign investment since January - 100% not true in any way shape or form).
Please, please, please provide evidence for your statement that I "defended an obviously compromised Biden." Go ahead - find one single place that I did that. I'll be here waiting.
So debating liberals who have TDS is a waste of both of our times. in 2028 try not lying about your candidates mental health and then rushing in a totally feckless/unserious joke who invented the term word salad. The elitism Brianna (and you have) is what I expect. You never spew "pure propaganda" and only you know truth. There, I wasted another minute ...
First, I want to commend The FP for consistently delivering some of the most insightful work, thoughtful conversations, and spirited debates in journalism today. That said, I feel compelled to respond to this episode—something I’ve never done.
Batya’s commentary was so disconnected from reality that it bordered on absurdity and incoherent. She clearly lacks a fundamental understanding of how the economy functions, from supply chains, labor markets, and other key factors.
At this point, I’m genuinely asking: Is this just part of an act, or is she actually acting as a shill for the administration? Either way, it’s disheartening to see such unserious analysis in an otherwise thoughtful publication.
I opened the comments section to say a little something about how Batya refuses to see nuance or even give in just a little - like Brianna does so many times - that some of Trump's actions might pose a challenge for working class people. She made assumption after assumption that anyone who questions Trump's approach to tariffs and revitalizing U.S. manufacturing somehow finds "working with your hands" shameful. What??? (Also, an iphone as the key luxury item example?? Please. Even very poor people have smartphones. 79% of households with an annual income of less than $30K own them. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/cell_phones/how-many-americans-own-a-smartphone.html)
Alas, it looks like I'm not the only one who found her unwillingness to have a reasoned conversation about Trump absurd. I take comfort in the fact that I have a lot of company.
Batya is completely absurd. I come to the FP to hear well reasoned opposing viewpoints, but she's a radical shill for viewpoints that make no sense, even to her I'm sure. She said as much - she's become very popular as the only voice will to support Trump's tariffs. And please spare me the advocacy for a working class America that she clearly has no personal experience with.
Batya needs to share facts as opposed to her outsized and rather superficial opinions. She does not add to the substance nor is her presentation on par with the high level of journalism at the FP.
When is the FP article coming out that denounces batya's communism. An ideology that destroyed eastern europe will surely destroy the united states
Folks: this isn't CNN/MSNBC...we don't demand censorship when we don't like a take. It's one thing to be critical (I too thought Batya could have done better, answered the questions posed instead of reframing them, and stopped implying those who disagree with her are stupid or "elite") .... it's wholly something else to demand deplatforming, cancelation, or censorship because you don't like the take. Let's stick to the merits.... that's why we're here (and that's why many of us are subscribers...and why some of us have been since the Common Sense days).
Batya is free to go wherever else she wants to lie & avoid answering direct questions but it's TFP's job to bring on guests that align with their supposed values of journalistic integrity. That's a minimum expectation of their audience. Not inviting her back on to discuss economics isn't censorship any more than calling it censorship that literally anyone else didn't get the podcast invite to begin with.
I would prefer her to come back on and debate an economist who knows the facts. Her "lies" or misstatements would be exposed for all to see/hear.
So, what you are saying is "ban her because she doesn't think like I do". This is why we can't get anything done in this country.
No. You've misunderstood my position entirely
If you don't like her take, don't listen to her. Easy peazy.
There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that she be censored is the latter. For example, you'll note my comment below...no where did I say she should be canceled. Now if the management decides they no longer want her on, that's on them. But it isn't my job to tell them how to do thiers.
https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/100-days-of-donald-trump?r=gu53t&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=113413102
Where have I demanded she or anyone be censored?
Where did I say you did?
As for others, there are plenty in the comments that ask that she be deplatformed (ie. censored).
"There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that she be censored is the latter. " - Lance Smith replying to my reply
How could TFP "deplatform" her? Even if they fired her and never asked her back on, she's free to go anywhere else that will hire her.
Yeah, cancel culture it's best. Been hearing that argument/justification for deplatforming demands years. It still amazes me that people still trot it out. No one buys it anymore (since we all know that this sort of censorship is chilling to honest debate - as we see the definition of what qualifies as a "firing offense" increases in a rush to the bottom - and since it doesn't work anyway as you just turn those deplatformed into martyrs). And as it pertains to outlets like the Free Press, this sort of cancel culture is what gave rise to independent media, so it would be a bit hypocritical to engage in the very tactics that failed the first time through. But yeah, you do you.
Personally, I'll stick to debating the merits instead of telling news outlets how to run their business. If they decide they want to fire Batya (or whatever) that's their call. I'm an adult and I can choose for myself who I read and who I don't. It makes absolutely no difference to me whether I agree with everyone at a news outlet or not. I choose which outlets I consume instead based on how tolerant they are of difference voices.
What are you talking about? Does Batya have an unlimited right to be a podcast guest for the organization that employs her?
You're making the pushback on her appearance in this episode of
"Honestly" so much bigger than it is. She's had many opportunities to express her views without much live pushback at all. To the credit of the paying customers who expect better, wouldn't it be preferable to find someone who can better articulate a pro-Trump position without resorting to flat out lies? If there is such a person that comes on, would Batya effectively be cancelled in your view?
Batya always plays the neat little “The American people say X, so X must be true” trick. There may also be a bit of “oh, so you hate working people if you don’t believe they think X”. Ever since Destiny called her out on this on his stream I see her making these moves LITERALLY every time she speaks. It’s actually crazy that this standard for argumentation makes it onto this show. What is happening?
Bari,
I don’t understand how you can feature Batya Unger Sargon on the Free Press. I do not have Trump Derangement Syndrome and agree with some of the actions that he has taken in the first 100 days, but anyone who gives him an A++ is not a serious person or was “smoking something” during the podcast. How can anyone take what she says seriously given her Trump grade. It completely diminishes all of her other opinions. By extension, it also diminishes the Free Press by having someone like her on the podcast. I will continue to be a loyal supporter of the Free Press, but certainly will not listen to her and read what she writes ever again. Hopefully, you will reconsider her role on the Free Press.
Your decision to read Batya is your own. In my comment, I was very critical of Batya and I think she did a terrible job arguing her case (calling people who disagree with you "elite" or implying they are stupid while refusing to answer the actual questions being asked isn't a good showing). But deplatforming is never the answer. That time has passed as the cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure. Instead of demanding censorship, let's stick to arguing on the merits.
“De-platforming” 🤣 As if being a paid FP contributor is every citizen’s right. There’s a difference between de-platforming and deciding to stop paying someone to do a job if they’re not doing it well. BUS has completely lost the nuance and analysis I’m relying on FP to bring to these discussions. If I want to hear someone yell about how wonderful it is to watch a POTUS pee all over the constitution because “the people” like it, there are plenty of platforms for that already. That’s not what I thought FP was about.
I am conservative and I absolutely LOVE the Free Press and the Honestly podcast. It is so valuable to hear people have opposing discussions about things they are passionate about. The greatest thing happening in todays journalism climate is all of these wonderful options. You can lean into Bari and Breonnas viewpoints but on the other hand respecting another persons voice will bring us to a place where we can reach across the aisle.
"As if being a paid FP contributor is every citizen’s right."
Yeah, that's not what that means.
"BUS has completely lost the nuance and analysis I’m relying on FP to bring to these discussions."
Then don't listen to her. Easy, peazy.
"That’s not what I thought FP was about."
You must be new here. If you wish to only hear positions that only comport with your preferred narrative, there are indeed plenty of platforms for that already (e.g. CNN and MSNBC). FP has always been about providing a forum for all positions and providing them with a proper airing. Like it or not, accept it or not by a majority of the electorate voted for Trump. Absolutely that position deserves full consideration. If you're unable to listen to that position, then no one is forcing you to listen.
That is actually what deplatforming means, Lance. It means you are removed from platforms that are seen as areas of free speech. It doesn’t mean you lose your paid job with a media outlet because you no longer bring nuance or analysis to the discussion. I actually want to hear a variety of perspectives. I’m not interested in those perspectives coming across as unserious cheerleading. I don’t want BUS to lose her role at FP because I don’t like her takes. It’s because her takes are no longer journalistic, and this is the only place on god’s green internet where real journalism still exists. I don’t want it tainted with nonsense. You’re fighting against an argument I’m not even making. I’m happy to scroll right past people I don’t like on social media all day. When I think someone is bad at a job that I’m helping to pay them to do, I state that opinion so that the people who decide how to spend my money know how I feel about it. BUS’s takes don’t bother me because I don’t agree with them (I agree with her about half the time actually). They bother me because they aren’t given with analysis and critical thinking anymore.
"That is actually what deplatforming means, Lance."
Demanding that people fire folks with whom you disagree - instead of just doing the adult thing and move on - is textbook deplatforming/cancelation and I simply don't condone it. You can have a different perspective of course, but I simply reject it wholesale.
"It’s because her takes are no longer journalistic, and this is the only place on god’s green internet where real journalism still exists. I don’t want it tainted with nonsense. "
Then don't listen to her.
There's a *right* way and a *wrong* way to be critical of a take you don't like. Demanding that someone be fired isn't it.
For example, in my comment below, I was highly critical of Batya. Now the management at the FP can decide whether they wish to continue to have her take (or Batya can decide she wants to take a different approach going forward). But it isn't my job to tell the Free Press whether they should keep her around.
https://open.substack.com/pub/bariweiss/p/100-days-of-donald-trump?r=gu53t&utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=113413102
You’ve really helped me understand that there is a right way to be critical and a wrong way to be critical. The right way is the way you like, and the wrong way is every other way. In fact, you have spent a not insignificant amount of time arguing with a person who agrees with 95% of what you’re saying so that I can get to 100% correctness. I’ll keep working on the other five percent to earn your favor. Promise 😘
That'd be great - thanks!
I used to enjoy Batya Unger Sargon's takes, but her inability to answer questions - and constant insinuation that the only reason people don't agree with her is because they are "elites" or stupid - really undermines her value in these discussions. I just don't find that sort of argument compelling as it's analogous to the arguments provided by the left for the last 10+ years (e.g. you're stupid/racist/sexist/etc if you don't see things just like they see it). Her weakest point was her constant diversion re:Abrego Garcia. Either she is just too high on her own supply or she simply doesn't understand the argument. The issue is not that he was deported (or that we don't want to live next to him)....the issue is HE WAS SENT TO PRISON with no due process. Regardless of whether I'd want him as a neighbor, we shouldn't be sending people to PRISON (for who knows how long) without a conviction and without an associated sentence. Makes one wonder: how many other people have been sent to prison with no conviction?
As for the ridiculous suggestion that Trump and the US is powerless to get him out of PRISON we wrongly put him in.... If El Salvador is more powerful than Trump's US, then that says far more about Trump and than it does about the Democrats flying down to visit him.
Look, I voted for Trump. I WANT him to be successful. But Bari's right: the Constitution is far more important than anything Trump is trying to do.
💯
To all the lovers of polls and rigged by the left town halls in R districts who say "Trump's losing all his support ..." Just more fake news . ‘Never Seen This’: Frank Luntz Says It’s Unprecedented That Trump Supporters ‘Staying Firm’ Despite Economic ‘Pain’.. Truth hurts I know. Sorry - not sorry. The "I'm losing my support for Trump support" said a real Trump supporter Never!! Fake news. Fake polls. Fake disruptions at town halls. That's what the left does best. THey almost got away with it on defending Biden's mental health. However, a mentally compromised Biden would have performed much better than the word-salad person ... P.S. note to Bari - next time have 2 R's/conservatives if you are so obviously going to take the side of the leftist. Or Get a better liberal who can hold their own vs. being so aghast that their opinions are not taken as gospel.
LOL - said every leftist..... if there's one consistency: when partisans don't like what polls are telling them, they'll maintain it must be a "conspiracy" or "fake news" .... but when they like what polls are telling them, suddenly those are the "right polls." At this point, to suggest that all is well in Trump land is to keep one's head firmly placed in the sand.
As for those who wish to blindly maintain "there's nothing to see here" re: Trump's support, speaking as an independent in a big purple state who voted for Trump, I WANT the guy to be successful. But based on Trump's flippant attitude concerning due process, free speech, lawfare, and the economy, I'll very likely be voting Democrat at the midterms unless Trump can get his shit together.
But yeah, it's all fake news....
It's horrifying to listen to Batya Unger Sargon laugh and say "would you want to live next to this guy?" as if that same sentiment wasn't used against Jews during WWII. Not wanting to live next to someone does not equal should be sent without due process to a foreign gulag for life in defiance of the Supreme Court. It's shocking that it goes so easily from “a man was accidentally sent there” to “it is ok” b/c as Sargon laughs, he is “a wife beater." The men in the Trump administration have been credibly accused and/or convicted of assaulting women (Hegseth, Trump, Gaetz... the list goes on) and I would not want to live next to them, but I would not send them a foreign gulag for life in defiance of the Supreme Court either.
The Free Press feels like home to lost centrists like me. I enjoy most of your content, even when I disagree. That said, it’s been hard to listen to Batya of late. She was interesting & in touch in 2024 but the world has changed and she hasn’t updated her script. It has become repetitive (and boring).
That's my take as well. Batya just doesn't have the credibility she once had: she seems a bit too high on her own supply at this point. Part of making a reasoned argument is to actually make a reasoned argument. Now she just yells at everyone who doesn't agree with her....while insinuating that everyone who doesn't see things just her way must be an "elite" or just stupid. We've heard similar language (e.g. you're a racist/sexist/etc) from the left for years and we see how that turned out. She's seriously in danger of making the same mistake. I love that Bari has someone who is so obviously pro-Trump, but Batya would be far more effective if she could thoughtfully answer the questions presented (instead of diverting, calling people names and screaming at people).
And I should note: I voted for Trump. I want the guy to be successful. But to just blindly go along with whatever Trump says isn't thoughtful commentary. Even Ben Shapiro has called Trump out when he doesn't agree with him. That's far more effective/credible.
So this debate turned out to be 2 against 1 it seems? Next time, bring on someone who doesn't spend all their time listening to their own liberal tribe and is a deer in headlights when challenged. Brianna is the poster child for the elite left - totally confounded how anyone could not agree with them/take a different position. Brianna didn't offer ONE solution. Just said Trump bad. At best when she gave tepid acknowledgement that an area was a problem (long list after Biden) her response was either A)he's not going about it the right way or B) It's impossible to thing the US can fill-in-the-blank. Biden's approval was better 1st 100 days - how did he end?
Hi Bari,
This podcast was hard to listen to. I was astonished how Ms. Ungar-Sargon was allowed to dominate the conversation, most prominently during the opening section on the economy. She ranted for at least 90% of the airtime during that segment. She was allowed to spout Trumpian nonsense without any pushback or correction. (I must say, she has taken on Trump’s style of Gish-galloping with bullshit.) You must get stronger opponent on the panel to counter her BS: David Frum would be a good choice (you even just had an excellent article on the FP from Frum; Ms. Wu, bless her, did not fill this need).
Perhaps substantial “opening statements” would help? Letting Ms. Ungar-Sargon rant on unchecked was damaging to the idea of this “debate”.
On the economy, one might ask Ms. Ungar-Sargon how bad the economic numbers would have to get before she would concede that Trump’s “plan” is a mistake? How exactly will higher prices for goods increase economic prosperity for Americans? Does she think that working-class Americans have no money in the stock market?
(Ms. Ungar-Sargon’s maniacal laughter is also extremely off-putting. She comes off as a mindless fan-girl and is very difficult to take seriously. One more “oh my gosh, are you kidding me?” will absolutely finish my respect for her.)
Ms. Ungar-Sargon’s dismissal of the lack of due process (Ms. Ungar-Sargon: Hint, due process is required in the USA under the Constitution) in the cases of the people being shipped to the El Salvadoran gulag is pathetic. Whether it’s popular with “most American voters” is irrelevant. Only “elites” care about due process in the USA? We should be governed by what Norm at the bar thinks is constitutional? Pathetic “thought” process. Ms. Ungar-Sargon, the SCOTUS has decided that Trump broke the law by denying these people due process. And due process depends on cost? If Trump doesn’t want to spend the money, then we don’t give people due process? She wants to deport people on “allegations” as she let slip. Perfect.
On the economy: Ms. Ungar-Sargon thinks 40,000 (current Dow) is “almost the same as” 45,000 (Dow in January)? (Another example of her bullshit.) If so, I have a really great bridge to sell her!
Or better yet, find a better advocate for the MAGA position, if such a thing exists.
Batya turned me around—opened my eyes. Her books are AMAZING. And yet my greatest fears are that the Trump cult of personality eclipses basic issues like due process, the Constitution, free speech. The prism of what Trump does and says becomes the litmus test for what is good, rather than core values that I care about (and that underpinned Batya's books). Batya now seems to embrace the cult far more than those values. It is painful to hear her giggling and self-contradicting as she casually trashes and blithely dismisses those of us who can see plainly with our own eyes that Trump's vengeful mafia is far more invested in owning the libs and wielding power than fixing what's wrong with America.
Just chiming in - Batya used to have valuable insights. She doesn't any more and she has gone full MAGA. I think you find her amusing, Bari, but you are very seriously risking your brand by having her on. Please stop platforming her as long as she is going to say completely false and unsupportable things. I don't think I am alone in wanting to cancel my subscription (and I have been here since before it was the FP) every time I hear her.
You must be new here. This isn't CNN or MSNBC with their well-sanitized takes. "Deplatforming" isn't something we do (giving everyone a fair hearing IS the Free Press brand and it is why I continue to be a subscriber).. Keep in mind that a majority of the US population voted for Trump and ALL voters have every right to have Trump's position fairly heard/explained/etc. And that includes opinions you believe to be "completely false and unsupportable."
In my comment, I was very critical of Batya and I think she did a terrible job arguing her case (calling people who disagree with you "elite" or implying they are stupid while refusing to answer the actual questions being asked isn't a good showing). But deplatforming is never the answer. That time has passed as the cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure. Instead of demanding censorship, let's stick to arguing on the merits.
"You must be new here." Did you even read my comment? I literally explained how long I've been subscriber.
You really need to open a dictionary and learn what "majority" means. No. A "majority" of the "US population" did not vote for Trump.
Cancelling someone is not the same as not giving them a free platform to spew complete unsupported and false bullshit, which is what Batya did in this interview. She used to be a credible source. She isn't any more. The FP should be above pure propaganda, which is what Batya is at this point.
What are you afraid of? Why do you wish to silence opposing views?
Presumably you know that CNN & MSNBC exist to keep you safely ensconced in narratives that comport with your own views, right?
The Free Press isn’t - and clearly doesn’t wish to be - CNN & MSNBC.
The cancel/deplatform movement was an unmitigated failure and quite literally gave rise to Trump (and yes, Trump won the popular vote - accept it or not). It’s time to embrace adulthood and quit asking the authorities to censor people you don’t agree with.
So....Bari should have anyone and everyone on her pod even if every single thing they say is a blatant lie?
I didn't say he didn't win the popular vote - I said a majority of Americans did not vote for him. I assume you can figure out the difference?
The assumptions you make about me are truly laughable.
So....Bari should have anyone and everyone on her pod even if every single thing they say is a blatant lie?
Spoken like a true 27%'er (if you've not check the approval of Democrat party). If you don't agree with how I think then you need to be cancelled. Got it. Spoken like a true liberal who yells and screams about ending democracy and call for the end of democracy they don't like. For 4 years you defended an obviously mentally compromised Biden, thought Kamala's tackle was 'cute', not a peep about open borders, loved Trans/WOKE rights/DEI, etc.. It's called The FREE Press not the WOKE/Progressive Press ... so Freedom only works one way from you lefties it seems ...
I didn't say "cancelled." I thought the FP was above spewing pure propaganda for Trump (or Biden or anyone else) that has no actual basis. That is what Batya did in this interview. I didn't say she should be "cancelled." I said she should not disgrace this amazing platform that Bari and Nellie built with her non-factual positions (i.e. $1.5 trillion in foreign investment since January - 100% not true in any way shape or form).
Please, please, please provide evidence for your statement that I "defended an obviously compromised Biden." Go ahead - find one single place that I did that. I'll be here waiting.
So debating liberals who have TDS is a waste of both of our times. in 2028 try not lying about your candidates mental health and then rushing in a totally feckless/unserious joke who invented the term word salad. The elitism Brianna (and you have) is what I expect. You never spew "pure propaganda" and only you know truth. There, I wasted another minute ...
Is this what you spend your time doing? Just going on SS and lying about people you don't know? What a weird hobby.