Criticized for doing his job, journalist becomes a conservative

Where does “the left” end and “the right” begins? Is there a middle somewhere where people are neither left nor right? Or is it that people who are in the middle — if it exists — just don’t post on the Internet or make it on to NPR?

These are the questions I considered as I listened to Steve Inskeep’s interview with journalist Chadwick Moore, who has left “the left” and joined “the right.”


  1. Listen Gay Journalist Leaves The Left Behind And Embraces A ‘Brand New Conservative’

    February 16, 2017

Moore wrote a post for Out Magazine profiling Milos Yiannopoulos, the senior editor for Breitbart News.

His friends shunned him and so he decided to now be a conservative.

Inskeep asked him whether he’s a moderate or a conservative — he’s described himself as both .

“To come out as a moderate is to be more aligned with the conservative,” he said.

“If you value things like free speech, if you value free thought, if you value individualism over collectivism, then you’re on the right now,” he said.

On NPR’s Facebook page, a listener suggests there’s a difference between defending free speech and being able to handle the criticism that comes with the job.

It is funny how the words ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ are thrown around as if they are clubs with standard rules. Did anyone curb your free speech? No. You are just mad that it was criticized. Critical thought is free speech too. I’m sure it sucked to reap the social consequences of what you did but that’s a democracy dude. Come talk to me when someone tries to take your press credentials for doing what you did. I just think you are whiney and you compromised your values in the face of criticism.

But the commenter misses an important point. As a journalist, Moore wasn’t guilty of doing anything but his job in profiling Yiannopoulos. He owed no allegiance to anyone but the ethics of telling a story.

Ironically, the utter inability to understand that distinction presently constitutes common ground between “the left” and “the right”.

  • dave

    Watch the whole “contamination” of left or right. That is IF you associate with X then I don’t like you. No matter why you associate with X or your actual views.

    When politics devolved into “the other side has evil motives” then the feeling was every person on that side was evil. Even if they held their nose when voting for whatever.

    I yearn for the old political discourse of “I know you & I are both trying to improve the country, but have you considered X aspect of your position” versus the un-thinking and easy “all those other people have evil motives”.

    • If you split your ballot — do people split their ballots anymore? — are you on the left or right?

      If you believe in limited government, but also support a woman’s choice, are you left or right?

      If you favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, but also believe business is overtaxed, are you left or right?

      • Leroy

        There was a time where I would split my ballot, but that was back when we still had centrists running for office. Today in time it seems we only have people who call themselves centrists but still to the party line regardless of what they believe.

      • Will

        I split my ballot this year, I voted for Johnson (couldn’t vote for Trump or Hillary) and voted for Paulsen (a Republican).

        I understand what this reporter deals with on daily basis and I agree with his political stances, I was once a Democrat but my party has left me. Try being a moderate in a liberal forum, you are attacked for being a right wing extremist constantly.

        BTW, I hold both sides of the views you explain above, I have aligned myself the Republicans because they are more accepting of my views and I feel the courts are pushing the social issues forward so I have little to fear from doing damage to those movements with my vote.

        • Why do you think you’re a moderate, specifically?What is it in your definition that separates you from “the right”?

          • Will

            Because I’m socially liberal and fiscally conservative.

            I voted against the marriage amendment and voted for Voter ID.

            Does that quality as moderate in your mind? Would it be moderate in your newsroom?

          • It would be to the left of a lot of people in the newsroom and to the right of a lot of others, I imagine.

            The party insiders, the ones who control the party process, would refer to you as a RINO.

          • Will

            Maybe some would but I’ll be honest, I’m much more accepted by moderates and conservatives than I am by liberals…Even my own liberal parents give me a hard time about my politics!

          • Do you think maybe they don’t think you’re a moderate? See, this is the thing, we throw these terms out as if they’re standardized terms and yet there really is significant differences in how these definitions are applied.

          • Will

            They know my stances on issues and I even get into specific policy discussions from time to time, the best was discussing an issue with my father and he agreed with me on the action moving forward on that issue. Then I showed him actual legislation being proposed by both political parties, he immediately changed his stance on the issue and aligned himself with the Democrats, then he accused me of being brainwashed. That’s the kind of thing I see constantly.

          • Joe

            I understand your frustration, and I’m not trying to tell you what you are or are not, but I think Bob’s point is an interesting one, and I’m just speaking in hypotheticals.

            Maybe your politics put you to the right of 80% of the US. You call yourself a moderate, and then say that the right is so much more accepting than the left. Which isn’t a shock, since ultimately you align with them much more.

            I also call myself a moderate. But I find the right much more exclusionary than the left. But maybe that is because my politics put me toward the left of 80% of the US.

            I don’t feel like I’m actually a lefty, and you don’t feel like you are actually righty. But maybe we are.

          • X.A. Smith


          • Rob

            It’s OK to come all the way over and be a progressive. The water’s fine.

          • Jay T. Berken

            I think that is the key, “throw these terms out”. I can have a great conversation with many people on general policy and use generalize language, UNTIL I slip on a term or name drop and it is off to the races. That is the point you know that the person is extreme right or left.

            There was a great Editoral in the New York Times talking about this:

          • Will

            Can I talk to the person who is more right leaning than me in your newsroom, I’d like to hear their perspective of how the newsroom operates at MPR, that’d be very interesting.

          • Sure, just pick up the phone and call the ones you think are.

          • Will

            Hmmm, the Freakonomics guys might be moderates over at WNYC. Honestly, I can’t think of anyone else I suspect might be a conservative or right leaning moderates at APM or NPR…I have no idea what Molly Wood might be…So maybe she’s moderate too, I doubt it though.

          • Maybe they’re good at their jobs and don’t allow their politics in their stories.

            If you can’t tell that a voice you hear every day is actually far right wing, doesn’t that tell you something?

            Anyway, I don’t want to get off track and go back to this old debate again.

            This thread is more for introspection and inspection.

          • Will

            True they might be but most reporters I hear from aren’t so great at that, I wonder if there is training on those issues to bring people back in line. It’s the subtle asides I hear constantly that really give away a reporter’s politics… oh, and Twitter.

        • Rob

          Johnson is essentially a Republican, so where’s the ballot split?

      • Jack Ungerleider

        The issue is 40-50 years old at this point. I’m old enough to remember John Lindsey (former mayor of NYC) started out as a republican. The long time liberal senator from NY Jacob Javetts was a Republican his entire carrier or that Strom Thurmond was a Democrat for most of his. There was a time when the major parties held forth primarily on economic issues, mostly related to the relationship of the employee to the employer. Within those parties there were liberals and conservatives (left and right) about different social issues. The realignment starts with Nixon in 1968 and is completed with Reagan in 1980. Now the two major parties align along both social and economic views and that has created the tension within the parties and rise in people identifying as “non-aligned”.

        • X.A. Smith

          I was about to say that when the rubber hits the road, you look at positions regarding labor and management, and economics as the primary criterion. Social issues are transitory in comparison.

      • Al

        I’ve split my ballot, though choosing independents in the past than fully crossing parties.

      • Rob

        If you split your ballot, you are neither right or left, you’re just kinda milquetoasty politically.

        Because government has no business in a woman’s reproductive decisions, there’s no conflict between supporting limited government and supporting reproducive freedom. So not a left/right issue.

        If you’re in favor of gay marriage but believe business is overtaxed, you’re a social liberal who reads the National Review.

      • theoacme

        I will never vote for ANY Republican or ANY Democrat/DFL ever again, even if Trump and Clinton make it a treasonable offense, punishable by being hung by my neck until I am almost dead, then set on fire, followed by 666 105mm howtizers firing beehive rounds into my body, followed by a tactical nuke warhead finishing me off…

        …splitting my ticket between Democrats and Republicans is, to me, splitting my vote between what mode of torture and death I prefer to have…

        …look at the defamation the Clinton campaign and her surrogates have done against Bernie Sanders, Ralph Nader, and Jill Stein (and are STILL doing against Ms. Stein)…

        …look at the Commission on Presidential Debates, owned lock, stock, and barrel by the Republican and Democratic National Committees…

        …no wonder I would rather die than live in this corporate fascist country that both the Democratic and Republican Party establishments orgiastically support…

        …and I honestly believe that all Republicans and Democrats would joyfully and orgiastically lynch me and my entire family…and I wish they would do so, now, today, this minute.

  • Will

    I woke up to hearing this story when my alarm went off this morning, great reporting and it tells a story that is rarely heard in the media, good work NPR.

  • Mike Worcester

    I’ll just post a couple thoughts here and see what happens 🙂

    He did his job as a journalist. Of that I believe. One might question the wisdom of a gay-oriented magazine interviewing a subject like Yiannopoulos, but he is out there, has a following, and has influence (like it or not) so to ignore him can be dangerous. That his friends shunned him for doing his job is sad and perhaps they need a lesson in the importance of a vibrant free press.

    I might not consider him a conservative. He also might find that the conservative label won’t fit well as a gay person. Then again, he might. And if so, good for him. This also highlights the difficulty in clearly defining just what terms like liberal and conservative really mean in the modern sense.

    His comment :”If you value things like free speech, if you value free thought, if you
    value individualism over collectivism, then you’re on the right now,” stuck me as a bit shrill and may have been borne from a reaction to how he felt he was treated. Or it could be truly sincere. I’ll accept the latter based on his tone in the interview though I also wonder how six months or a year from now he will feel about using that term to describe himself.

    The question posed by Bob about if moderates exist is fair and I will say they do. What defines them? It used to be from a political standpoint that they embraced neither of the far ends of the political spectrum but instead tried to find the best practical solutions to pressing problems. They were pragmatic rather than ideological in their approach. Now however it seems that to be moderate means you don’t scream and shout about your beliefs, but you still have them and vote accordingly. One was rooted in a place on the belief spectrum, the other is based on temperament and approach.

  • Kassie

    So this guy was on the left. Then his friends and others criticized him, so he is now on the right. Does that mean people criticizing him, fairly or not, made him change all his views overnight? That is a man with very weak values if they can be changed by some criticism of work he did. Sounds more like a publicity stunt than anything else to me.

    • Will

      Trust me it’s a very slow process, it takes years and he didn’t go to the extreme right, he simply moderated on a few issues and yes that’s getting him attacked because that’s unacceptable in some liberal circles.

      • Jack Ungerleider

        I suspect if he had gone the other way he would have been vilified just as much.

    • My take: “Snowflake”. 😉

  • Will

    I think the media does us a disservice by only covering the most extreme elements of each political party (as noted in this story). If you want more reasonable understanding of right leaning moderates in the Twin Cities then I would recommend listening to the Up and at ‘Em podcast, two local guys have on Republicans in this state and they are very reasonable. Btw, these guys were on morning talk radio until they were fired, now they run this podcast:

    • Well, again, I’m curious as to how people define these terms that are commonplace in political discourse. The EXTREME right. The EXTREME left. Where is that line that separates the EXTREME from the non-extreme?

      • Will

        Covering white supremacists, giving them airtime is extreme. NPR did that during the campaign and soon after.

        I’d love to hear from moderate women GOP members in this state legislature on MPR more often. I hear from 2-3 a week on Up and at ‘Em.

        • What stories are the moderate GOP women key in ?

          For the most part, there are only a handful of legislators who “matter”. Leadership. The rest are just votes.

          • Will

            Have you been paying attention in the state legislature? Sarah Anderson has been doing amazing work investigating the MSFA and asking about Rebecca Otto suing the state over a bipartisan law.

            Anne Nue just won a special election, Michele Benson is always doing great work.

          • JamieHX

            It is not a “bipartisan law” that Otto is suing over.

          • Will

            The one passed by DFL controlled senate, GOP house and signed by a DFL governor?

          • JamieHX

            The law was tacked on to a state government finance bill (which violates the single-subject rule, by the way) at the very end of the 2015 session, and legislators approved it (one article I read said they felt “strong-armed”) and Governor Dayton reluctantly signed it because they had to do so in order to finish on time.

          • Sarah Anderson is in our stories all the time.

            Who aren’t you hearing on the air is what I’m asking.

          • Will

            Well I’m not hearing those GOP women on the talk shows, that’s what I’m talking about.

        • And you didn’t really answer the question. That’s what NPR did was being extreme. I’m asking where someone on the right sees the line between being on the extreme right vs. being on “the right”. What is the issue or issues that separate the right?

          • Will

            White supremacists are extreme, socialists are extreme.

          • But neither of those are issues. Nor, it seems to me, are they even terms that today’s warring factions can even agree on.

          • Will

            You’re forgetting that a socialist almost won the DNC nomination. I’d suggest socialism was a very real issue in the primary.

      • Anton

        It’s hard for me to say, and depends on the issues in play. I consider myself on the liberal side, and would suggest that…

        Single-payer health care advocacy is on the extreme left (as American politics goes), while supporting government health care subsidies is non-extreme left.

        Confiscatory tax rates for the wealthy (as for instance the 60-75% in the WWI era) are extreme; higher tax rates than today are non-extreme.

        Support for full civil rights, including marriage, adoption, the right to serve in the military, and the right to build places of worship for gays and non-Christians is not extreme, though for marriage it probably would have been considered so twenty years ago. Interestingly, on the right I feel that prejudice against non-Christians has migrated more towards the mainstream and away from the extremes since the 1980s and 1990s.

        Perhaps the definitions of extremity come down to percentages of those who espouse a position? They certainly do shift over time.

      • D.Robot

        Perhaps extreme leftists consider anyone more moderate to be rightists? Perhaps they view the right as evil and moderates as non existant. Same idea in reverse for extreme rightists.

        • Where in your perspective experience is the line that separates your self identification from the next category?

          • D.Robot

            Personally, I’d keep myself out of the “extreme” identification because (if I lean one way or the other) I don’t subscribe wholly to that one party on that side, or refuse to look at or even contemplate the merits of a candidate from the other side of the political spectrum.

    • MrE85

      Once again, I have to fall back on my “Potter Stewart” position. I may not be able to define political extremism, but I know it when I see it.

    • RBHolb

      “Moderate” has to be the most-overused term in our political lexicon, right up there with “pragmatic.” Does it still mean anything? Did it ever?

      When asked, most people will decline to identify themselves as “extremists,” but will call themselves “moderate,” as in “I’m pretty moderate on most things.” Moderation has evolved into a shorthand term for “things I believe in.” It’s a safe place: I can think of only one instance where moderation was called out as bad (the oft-quoted line Barry Goldwater’s speechwriter cribbed from Cicero: “Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”).

      • MikeB

        I’m basically middle of the road – Most Everyone

  • MrE85

    Enjoy life in your new Log Cabin, kid. If a gay man wants to be a conservative, that’s fine with me. Same for members of racial and ethnic minorities that embrace the right end of the political spectrum. As we like to say, it’s a free country.

    But now that you’re a bona fide, out-of-the-closet Righty, could you PLEASE stop offering opinions on what the Left thinks, believes, or stands for? Instead, tell us what YOU now believe, or what your new friends believe
    I’m willing to listen. Honest, I will.

    • Will

      Here’s a question, is it valid for a person who was a liberal and is now a right leaning moderate to explain their own mindset when they were a liberal? Can they explain the intolerance they experienced from one side or the other with their new perspective? That’s what it looks like he’s doing in the story above.

      • Sure.

        I think where it gets tricky — from a journalistically accuracy point of view — is when the anecdotal is used for an overall conclusion.

        And that’s where we are in the country, which is why I’m trying to limit the proclamations on both sides about the other and, instead, allow people to tell their individual stories and perspectives.

        This story is about something else, however. It’s about the role of journalists to tell stories that people may not want to hear.

        There’s a lot of that going around these days. You may have noticed.

  • David Brauer

    A conservative is a liberal journalist who’s been mugged. (PS the “collectivist” crack shows a guy who’s probably long harbored a hidden Randian.)

    • Mike Worcester

      He might be better off using the term “libertarian” to describe himself, but that word also has different meanings and is inconsistently used by pretty much everyone except maybe members of the Libertarian Party.

      • MrE85

        A Libertarian is just a Republican who doesn’t want to give up smoking pot, IMHO.

        • Will

          I’ve smoked weed with some very hard core conservatives and even they want to legalize marijuana.

        • JamieHX

          LOL. That’s exactly what I’ve always said.

    • Jerry

      Wouldn’t that make Dan Rather (or Kenneth?) a conservative?

  • CeeZeeWeeZee

    He lacks the courage of his convictions, so he took his ball and went home. He’s not the first, nor the last.

    • What would having courage of convictions look like in this scenario? Would he pass on doing the interview?

  • Veronica

    So the catalyst for this story is that a guy wrote a story about someone who got himself banned from Twitter for really hateful speech, and the journalist is now getting coverage by telling us his friends were mean to him because of his piece?

    Eh. I call shenanigans.

    But to answer the question of extremism, I would say motives need to be taken into account. If your goals are to destroy a group of people, or to enslave them, or take away their access to food, water, shelter, and health care, that’s extreme.

    Politics should be based on creating laws and policies that for which the greater good can be achieved; we may not agree on how best to go about it.

    • How does that apply to his job as a journalist?

      • Veronica

        The first point I made or the second?

  • Jerry

    It sounds like it is less about his political beliefs and more about which “club” he wants to be in.

    • Will

      Simply read this thread and tell me he’s wrong.

      • Will, this is a good thread with respectful back and forth.

        I’m discouraging as many references to “the left” and “the right” as I can because they’re used a perjoratives when the goal here is to try to identify the definitions we use and why attempting to do so is a fool’s errand.

        And yet, we’re still looking for “common ground” in the nation’s dialogue based on definitions that are not standardized.

        Given that, what is the method to achieve this search for common ground? That’s the issue.

        • Will

          I agree, people are being mostly respectful so far…Although I do see some digs at the “others” from time to time.

        • Will

          I tried to do what you asked above, trying to articulate my disagreement with the mainstream of both political parties. I agree attacking only one party or group is hypocritical.

      • Jerry

        So because some people were mean to him, he suddenly opposes a women’s right to chose, voting rights, and other liberal values, and support for the disadvantaged? If so, his beliefs were not strongly held .

        • Will

          You just made an assumption about what the other side believes and I (I suspect he would as well) agree with you on most of those issues.

          • Jerry

            Than he is not, by definition, a conservative. He is just someone angry with his friends.

          • Will

            He’s a moderate, like me, the right just seems to be more accepting of moderates right now, from his and my perspective.

          • Jerry

            Than what are the values of the “left” that you oppose?

          • Will

            Unions, high tax rates, over regulation, too many welfare programs, Social Security as it is currently run (going bankrupt before I can use it), emphasis on trains, suppressing certain types of speech, funding stadiums, tax credits for specific industries, 47% of federal filers not paying FIT, affirmative action, inability to cut federal spending & fighting Voter ID.

            Things I disagree with on the right are banning abortion on the state level, fighting LGBT marriage, excessive defense spending and being too eager to go to war. Oh, too eager to support police in all cases, I like a more skeptical view of police. Legalization of drugs too, I’d like to see that and prison reform.

          • Jerry

            About half of those are helping the disadvantaged and fighting voter suppression. And I don’t know many on the left who support taxpayer funded stadiums.

          • Will

            Dayton did…I believe there are non-left/right issues where we could come to agreements on like retraining lower income, disadvantaged people rather than using handouts.

          • Jerry

            Dayton has done a lot of things that many in the left would disagree with.

          • Anton

            The stadium issue is a good example of one which doesn’t fit a simple left/right model. There are those on the left & right who oppose them as bad uses of public funds, those on the left supporting them for construction or entertainment-related jobs, those on the right supporting them for economic development, and probably a lot of other nuanced reasons.

            I may not agree with the outcomes (for what it’s worth, I’m in the “spend it on something useful to more people” camp), but I am always glad when a reasonable discussion is held between people on all sides and a decision is then made through consensus. From my perspective in Wisconsin, the Minnesota state government is much better at that.

          • RBHolb

            Taking a critical eye to the “values” you oppose, I can see why you might be identified as “conservative,” rather than “moderate.”

            You seem to be against empowering workers to put them on a roughly equal footing with employers (that’s what unions do, with varying degrees of success). Affirmative action and fighting voter ID are to help promote racial injustice–you can’t just wave a wand and declare racism over, and I don’t care what anyone says, race is a big motivator behind voter ID laws (affirmative action is also about more than quotas, but I’ll leave that to another day). You claim to oppose high tax rates, but you want more lower-income people to pay. An “emphasis on trains” is a matter of perspective, or do you oppose planning for future transportation needs?

            I also don’t see what is leftist about “funding stadiums, tax credits for specific industries.” Those two items are supported and opposed on both sides of the aisle.

            Whatever you mean by “suppressing certain types of speech,” I read it as a code phrase for voicing slurs and being held accountable for that. Call it “political correctness” if you like. Some of us call it working towards an inclusive society.

            Finally “over regulation, too many welfare programs” are just words next to other words. The conservative commentator PJ O’Rourke once said that political language means nothing if someone can’t oppose it. Who favors “over regulation, too many welfare programs?” It’s all in the eye of the beholder, and most beholders would, if they were honest, admit that it means things that don’t help them, personally.

          • Will

            I agree with you, we see these issues very differently.

          • Rob

            Well said.

          • X.A. Smith

            I think socially that’s true. But within the political power structure, it’s almost anybody’s guess. The parties are mid-shakeup, and a lot of coalitions are changing in all directions.

          • Rob

            I believe Congress’ move to let mentally ill people acquire handguns illustrates your point about moderates exceedingly well.

        • Rob

          Yes! It’s scary too think anyone, much less a decent reporter, would abandon their deeply held political convictions merely because he or she was the subject of some unkind pushback in regard to something they wrote.

  • Michael

    One of the things that interest me is a few years ago there was a website, I apologize I cannot remember where it is, that would tell you where you were on the political spectrum. I consider myself centrist, looking to make a compromise that everyone hates a bit of so we know we are doing a good job for everyone and it said I had moved from being centrist to being half-way to an extreme, and the graphs show that the whole scale has been pulled towards one side so people who used to be considered centrist are now considered leaning right, I believe. This is not good news because now centrist who want to compromise can be labeled and ignored and what used to be considered way out there is now considered just a little bit out there.

    • X.A. Smith

      Nixon would be too far left for today’s Republican party. It may be swinging back the other way a little now. 90’s Bill Clinton is centrist for today. These labels are poor tools overall. Since 2000 there has been so much movement to the left socially, while local governments have moved so far to the right. It makes most people uncomfortable.

      • Jerry

        ’90’s Bill Clinton was a centrist then.

        • X.A. Smith

          Yeah. I wrote that way too fast. 😉

  • Deborah

    Have commenters here read the original article in “Out”? I just did and find it to be a good piece of journalism. The subject of the story is “deplorable”, but the reporter and his story are not. Attacking the reporter for writing the article was wrong. The reporter “becoming a conservative” because of the criticism was ridiculous.

    • Bingo!

    • Will

      I agree, he shouldn’t be attacked for writing a story, that’s wrong… amazing that we had so many comments before someone flat out said that. I also agree, he didn’t flip parties due to harassment after one article, more likely he was already a moderate and he probably had many incidents that were pushing him to the right before this moment but the attacks might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.

      • It takes a thick skin to be in the business.

        But the free press being personally attacked for doing its job is a growing problem. He’s just a symptom.

        • Will

          Speaking of thick skins, what a press conference, anything you have to say about it? Maybe a topic for the blog.

        • Beach Bro

          Another growing problem is on-line magazines and newspapers using sub-par writers instead of paying quality journalists to write stories.

    • Beach Bro

      It wasn’t a good piece of journalism at all. Imagine the same subject being covered by a journalist writing for the Washington Post or the New York Times. They sent a boy to do a man’s job and the article reads as such.

  • Beach Bro

    The problem with the article in question was not how the author votes…after all no less than George Will changed his voter registration and left the Republican party…it’s that the article on Milo Yiannopoulos was written in a very mediocre manner. There’s a kind of high-school journalist feel to his prose. Anderson Cooper this fellow Chadwick ain’t.

    Earlier, he was quoted as saying, “For example, I support an evangelical Christian florist who doesn’t want to do the flowers for a gay wedding. You can go to another florist to do your flowers. Don’t unleash the ACLU on granny and her bucket of dyed carnations.”

    Thank God Moore wasn’t around during the pre-civil rights era. For example, let’s test his logic and substitute the words “gay wedding” for black wedding. “I support a Christian florist who doesn’t want to do the flowers for a black wedding. You can go to another florist to do your flowers. Don’t unleash the ACLU on granny and her bucket of dyed carnations….” Or, if you will, substitute the words “gay wedding” for “Jewish wedding”. You get my drift.

    At any rate, it’s a mute point. The Supreme Court in Washington just ruled unanimously that “granny and her bucket of red carnations” discriminated against the gay couple.

    That’s Supreme Court 9…Chadwick 0.

    • OK, but you said the issues isn’t about how he votes but how he writes and then all of your examples were his beliefs.

  • kennedy

    That’s the problem with current politics and a two party system. There is a desire to identify people (and reporting) as either red or blue. Something good for red must be bad for blue. If you are blue (or red), you must agree with grand conglomerate (whatever that is) on everything. It reduces every topic to a litmus test. It inhibits intellectual, considerate debate of nuanced topics. You can see in this case even the journalist himself, influenced by the behavior of those around him, thought he had to choose a side. We are far to eager to separate ourselves, and our behavior is a significant contributor the the current caustic political environment.

  • lindblomeagles

    I think Bob and the journalist miss the point. Yes, he did his job by interviewing Yiannopoulus. HOWEVER, as a MODERATE voter prior to the story, the journalist AGREED with some of the things conservatives stand for. Moderate DOES NOT mean I’m fully committed to a liberal (or conservative) agenda. THAT, more than anything else, IS why his liberal friends shunned him. And by the way, people HAVE the right to shun you if you don’t share their political views, ESPECIALLY if this journalist FOR EXAMPLE, believes a ban on Muslims or a wall for Latinos is a good thing to have. Obviously, we want to encourage less shunning and more common ground, but if his liberals friends discovered the journalist IS NOT honest with himself (as well as them) about his beliefs, shunning is in the cards, and he, as a journalist, should have already known that AFTER covering the 2016 Election.

    • I might well have missed the part of the article where the journalist weighed in with his agreement. Where was it?

      • lindblomeagles

        Bob, please re-read the article in Out Magazine, and then listen to the journalist’s transcript with Steve Inskeep. When the journalist starts discussing in the Out Magazine article the fall-out Yanniopoulus received for slandering, racially, the Ghostbuster Movie Star ‘Jones, the journalist wrote, “Instead, the incident merely served to convince many of Yiannopoulos’s followers that the system was rigged by the liberal left to censor and shut down the right.” He goes on to write a few paragraphs later, “Instead, in order to accurately see the Trumpian soul, one must accept the Trump movement’s defining philosophical point: that the media has become lazy and arrogant and suffers from a pathologically liberal bias.” The journalist follows this veiled agreement with Yiannoupolis in Out Magazine with a similar spoken conclusion IN HIS OWN INTERVIEW with Inskeep, which is the liberals who are not interested in hearing people of differing opinions out, and that his values are more similar to those of conservatives. To prove his point, and answer Inskeep’s question, the journalist says, shortly before the 4:40 mark, “While I don’t agree with Mike Pence’s view on sexuality, I do agree with religious freedom. I don’t think Christians should be forced to marry gay and lesbian couples. Find another church to do that.” The journalist’s liberal friends Bob found out that the journalist does not share some of the same beliefs and values, and they CHOSE to move on from him. That his friends just found this out may indicate to the journalist as well as to his friends, that their friendship might not have been as open or as close as they both originally believed it to be. But, the journalist’s friends were surprised and taken aback, not so much by the job the journalist had to do, but by the AGREEMENT the journalist had with some of his subject’s political views. Thank you so much for your question and your blog. Keep on writing.