Margaret Sullivan, a columnist for the Washington Post, found herself in deep trouble this past Sunday for trying to use the death of her former colleague to try and call for the censoring of Joe Rogan on Spotify.
Sullivan put forth the idea that Rogan’s comments last week about holding interviews with people who have differing views from the mainstream narrative concerning the pandemic “made her furious” due to the fact that she was “spending a lot of time this week thinking about Miguel Rodriguez [later referred to as ‘Miggy’], a former colleague of mine, who died of covid last week.”
Sullivan then went on to add:
He was overweight and asthmatic; in other words, very much at risk. And he was unvaccinated.
I don’t know for sure whether getting vaccination and booster shots would have saved Miggy’s life. And I have no idea whether he had ever listened to Joe Rogan’s podcast, or what his precise reasons were for not being vaccinated.
Sullivan also stated that Spotify needed to effectively highlight that it is a “publisher” so that it could “make decisions about what’s appropriate” to officially publish. Sullivan stated, with absolutely zero evidence, that most of the 900,000 American deaths that were attributed to COVID-19 could have been outright “prevented if it weren’t for the rampant misinformation that has discouraged so many from getting vaccines and taking other steps to protect themselves.”
Sullivan received extreme backlash online for seemingly dragging her former colleague’s death into the argument in order to try and push for the censorship of Rogan.
The most notable responses included:
- John Nolte, with Breitbart: “Margaret Sullivan is a typical condescending racist who doesn’t believe black people have minds of their own and are easily manipulated.”
- Bethany Mandel, a political commentator: “There were no editors on duty?”
- Dana Loesch, a radio host: “Blaming your friend’s death on a podcast you admit he may not have listened to doesn’t sound like grief, it sounds like convenient exploitation.”
- Liz Wolfe, with Reason: “It’s obviously incredibly disrespectful of Sullivan to trot out a colleague’s death like this, but that grossness aside…at what point do we say: People have made their choices. They’re not mindlessly manipulated by Rogan, they have access to ALL kinds of information out there.”
- Shant Mesrobian, a political commentator: “Using the death of a colleague to write a completely unrelated and cynical hit piece on a media figure you don’t like is a pretty good way to understand how rotten the souls are of the people who work in failing legacy media.”
- Luke Thompson, a political strategist: “A self-respecting profession would shun fellow journalists who attack the culture of tolerance necessary to sustain the First Amendment. Journalism is not such a profession.”
- Steve Krakauer, a political commentator: “What a morally bankrupt column… co-opting the death of a ‘beloved’ colleague to spread pro-censorship misinformation – because if he HAD listened to Joe Rogan, he’s have been urged to get vaccinated, as Rogan has said many times for someone who is ‘overweight and asthmatic.’”
- Javier E. David, with Yahoo News: “Imagine thinking this was a good way to honor a colleague. Shameful.”
- Jon Gabriel, with Ricochet: “My friend died of cancer. I don’t know if he ever read Margaret Sullivan but…”
- Dan Gainor, with NewsBusters: “It’s shocking that a major news outlet ran this piece of crap. Losing people we love makes us want to lash out sometimes. But this is inexcusably bad.”
The post Washington Post In Hot Water For ‘Shameful’ Op-Ed appeared first on Steadfast and Loyal.
Source by [author_name]
