A @nytimes reporter saying that it's okay for the New York Times to use a fabricated story as a source in "defence of @jk_rowling" because the person writing the defence is not classified as a "reporter," but as an "oped writer." 
5 mins of research was all it took to find that "EJ" was attending "gender critical" events in mid 2022, when she was supposedly a "trans ally." Recently, she threatened to publish pics of the person who ran that event's children if she didn't get her lifetime sub fee back.
She has never named the publication who commissioned her, and recently published a new article where she claimed that "trans Twitter" were at war with Taylor Swift, which simply wasn't happening. Asked for a source, she couldn't produce a single tweet. Because she made it up.
But by the "OpEd" standards of the @nytimes, it's absolutely fine for one of their OpEd writers to use this fantasist as a source to bolster her argument, because when it's under the title of "OpEd" any old fabricated BS can be used as a source. No ethics or journalism required.
.@benryanwriter would like me to point out here that he is not a NYT reporter, he is a NYT contributor.
Happy to do so.
Happy to do so.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
