Thread by @rickperlstein

I just got an interview request from a reporter at an agenda-setting DC publication. It began, "I'm working on a magazine story about political buzzwords (i.e. 'critical race theory,' 'equity,' 'cancel culture,' etc.)"—then went on...

"...and how liberals and conservatives ascribe different meanings to them. I'm not as much interested in who's more 'right' about what something like 'critical race theory' means, as the ways in which the definitions differ depending on who you ask..."

"I was wondering if you'd be willing to chat for a bit this week or next about that and how you make sense of this moment." With Eric Boehlert gone, I'm less inclined to let stuff like this slide. So I took up the invitation to "chat," with an email reading thus:

"his framing is horrifying to me, the sort of thing that actively contributes to the destruction of American democracy. These are not 'political buzzwords' to which liberals and conservatives 'ascribe different meanings'...

"...but products of careful propaganda campaigns to seed moral panics in order to roll back human rights for everyone who is not conservative, using techniques quite similar to Nazi propagandists..."

"This also represents atrociously biased journalism. When one side is willing to lie, cheat, and steal to achieve political dominance, and the gatekeeping media represents their efforts as one 'side' in some neutral political debate..."

"...you are acting as a convey belt to aid and abet their strategy of dominance.

If you're open to a statement about that, I can prepare something for the record.

Regards,
Rick"