Thread by @HoarseWisperer

White privilege is getting one of the most important jobs in journalism at the newspaper where your father worked and then having your predominantly white industry peers reflexively rush in to defend you from any and all criticism no matter how deserved.

Anyone here believe the same volume of fellow journalists would rush headlong to throw themselves on the pyre for a Black colleague?

I don’t.

Anyone here believe a Black journalist could flatly reject all feedback and snidely snipe at critics online without consequence?

I don’t.

People are going to say “What? No, defending Maggie Haberman has nothing to do with race!”

Yes, it does.

She would not have her position without privilege.

She would not have inside access to a white supremacist presidential administration without privilege.

She would not be free to be snidely argumentative with, and dismissive of, critics online without privilege.

And when someone is in a role of importance serving an audience with less privilege, the least that can be expected is accountability.

The headlong rush to immunize Haberman from all criticism isn’t just a benign defense of a professional friend.

It is an example of the ways privilege systemically advantages white journalists on the way in and then forevermore once inside.

With privilege comes responsibility.

The already privileged don’t need to be protected like porcelain dolls. They are already protected enough.

If Haberman’s peers need someone to advocate for, there are plenty of journalists with less privilege. Go advocate for them.

//