Re. the @seanwilentz essay, I can state first hand that I wrote the @nytimes twice seeking narrow, specific factual corrections to errors in the #1619Project in fall 2019.

The paper completely ignored the first, and handwaved the second away by stating they would make no change.
The first - which I sent them via multiple channels in November 2019 - concerned Matthew Desmond's misrepresentation of Alan Olmstead & Paul Rhode's empirical work on cotton production to make false and unsubstantiated claims about the slave economy.

It was completely ignored.
When I had an opportunity to question @nhannahjones about this letter in December 2019, she at first claimed that the paper never received it and accused me of lying about sending it. When I produced the receipts, she dropped the subject and just ignored it entirely.
The second time I wrote the NYT was in January 2020. It too concerned a narrowly focused and well-documented error in Desmond's essay, involving his misrepresentation of a claim from Caitlin Rosenthal's book "Accounting for Slavery."
This time NYT Magazine editor Jake Silverstein responded by informing me that the paper was unwilling to correct the error, and was attributing it to interpretive differences surrounding the language that the 1619 Project used.
1619 Project claimed modern day accounting such as Microsoft Excel has "roots [that] twist back to slave-labor camps"

Rosenthal said exact opposite: "This is not an origins story. I did not find a simple path where slaveholders' paper spreadsheets evolved into Microsoft Excel"
Both of these attempts to obtain simple, clear-cut corrections to factual errors in the 1619 Project were refused by the paper. I went through all proper channels before writing my own essay on it here.

The NYT was simply not interested.…
FWIW, I can also reveal for the first time that I was working on a project that proved Confederate-named school construction suddenly spiked in 1954 after Brown v. Board.

NHJ asked me over twitter to share my findings in August 2019. I wrote her as requested. She never replied.
More that I can reveal: in Nov 2019, NHJ tried to use my book to refute criticism of her depiction of Lincoln by James McPherson - even tweeting out a link to it on amazon.

She did not realize that I was the author.
After she put 2+2 together and realized I was the same person who sent the NYT multiple letters seeking corrections to the 1619 Project, NHJ dropped all mention of my book. Then she began attacking me personally at every opportunity she had.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Phil Magness

Phil Magness Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PhilWMagness

16 Sep
The errors in the 1619 Project have been listed in exacting detail, @nhannahjones. I wrote an entire book on them, in addition to writing you and your editor directly to seek corrections.

You ignored the problems, then smeared those who pointed them out.
@nhannahjones The inescapable truth is that many historians are afraid to speak out about the 1619 Project's problems because you - @nhannahjones - will attack and smear anyone and everyone who does so.

I know this first hand because you did it to me when I spoke out. Image
@nhannahjones And here is how Nikole Hannah-Jones responded @coldxman, an African-American critic, after he penned a nuanced and thoughtful essay on the problems with her 1619 Project essay.

Her behavior throughout has been unprofessional, belligerent, and awash in her own bigotries. Image
Read 7 tweets
15 Sep
Periodic reminder that lockdowner scientists @gyamey and @gorskon's favorite go-to source for attacking the Great Barrington Declaration has some very peculiar ideas about why the Twin Towers fell.…
@GYamey @gorskon Earlier this week, Yamey and Gorski leaned heavily on this same source for an article attacking the GBD in @bmj_latest. I wonder if the BMJ editors are comfortable with them repeatedly invoking a 9/11 Truther's blog as a source for commentary in one of the top medical journals?
And lest there be any confusion, Yamey is a huge fanboy of this guy.
Read 4 tweets
5 Sep
1. VA House of Burgesses condemned the Intolerable Acts against Boston Tea Party in June 1774

2. Fairfax Resolves (signed by Washington & Mason) were issued in July 1774 in direct response to same

3. Dunmore dissolved legislature in retaliation

4. Dunmore's Proc. was Dec 1775
The order of these events matters greatly in understanding why Dunmore even tried to issue his proclamation against an already-revolting colony in the first place. @nhannahjones's timeline reordering is creative, to put it mildly.
@nhannahjones Icing on the cake: the Fairfax Resolves of 1774, signed by Washington and Mason, specifically condemned Parliament for propping up the international slave trade, among its list of complaints.
Read 10 tweets
4 Sep
This is awfully tone-deaf. Whatever its limitations, Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation was without doubt motivated by genuine antislavery beliefs.

Dunmore, by contrast, was a slaveowner & went on to become Gov. of a particularly brutal slave regime in the Bahamas after Am Rev.
Deeper history of Lincoln's EP dates back to earliest days of the war when he backed the confiscation acts to solidify the "contrabands" precedent of freeing escaped slaves at Fort Monroe. Yes, this was a war measure. But it was absolutely motivated by antislavery beliefs.
By contrast, Dunmore was reappointed to Nassau after Virginia...and promptly went to work forcing slaves to build him a system of fortresses on the island in one of the most brutal episodes in the entire history of the Bahamas.…
Read 4 tweets
1 Sep
Oh look. Another extraordinarily bad covid take from the @BadCOVID19Takes guy:

New York Times on 3/16/20, reporting that the Imperial College model directly helped to sway the Trump admin to support lockdowns.…
Additional context:

April 2020 report by Nature identifying the Imperial College model for the US and UK as the main driver behind the worldwide covid response…
Read 5 tweets
23 Aug
From a 2019 paper by historian Quinn Slobodian in the journal Contemporary European History. Note how he deleted the 2nd half of the sentence to change the Mises quote's meaning.

Slobodian's misrepresentation was flagged during peer review of his article. The journal ignored it.
When I brought this problem to the attention of the journal's editors back in March, they insisted Slobodian's piece had undergone rigorous peer review and dismissed my concern.

Not so. Peer review flagged the same concern. The journal's editors ignored it.
In the time between my original complaint and the journal's dismissive response, the journal added a new editor to its board - the same Quinn Slobodian whose misrepresentations I had brought to their attention.…
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!