A month ago, I offered a Pulitzer-Prize-winning-journalist $10,000 if she could find video evidence of the exact quote she was attributing to Charlie Kirk in her post, word for word.
She still hasn't found it.
This is PULITZER PRIZE winning journalist...
She still hasn't found it.
This is PULITZER PRIZE winning journalist...
Somehow, people forgot what a “quote” actually is.
It’s not a summary.
Not your interpretation.
Not “what they basically meant.”
A quote is, word-for-word, the exact sounds that came out of someone’s mouth.
A significant number of people in the comments don't get this.
It’s not a summary.
Not your interpretation.
Not “what they basically meant.”
A quote is, word-for-word, the exact sounds that came out of someone’s mouth.
A significant number of people in the comments don't get this.
I genuinely thought we had figured this out collectively, but I guess Leftists STILL need a lesson on how words work.
Charlie said, "you"
Not "Black women"
"you"
It’s the difference between categorizing an entire group of people, (racism) and pointing to individual people, as individuals, who benefited from DEI, (not racist).
It’s a massive distinction that seems to have been completely lost on the people who just are itching to call Charlie a racist, when he clearly was not.
It’s even more worrisome that thousands of you don’t understand what it means to put someone’s words in quotation.
Because if he didn’t actually say “black women”, then you cannot put it in quotes.
That's how quotes work, which is why quotation marks are important.
You don’t need a degree in linguistics to understand this concept. It’s basic literacy... and also it’s also basic ethics.
If you’re going to frame someone’s sentence as evidence of bigotry, you owe the audience, and the person you’re accusing, the courtesy of fidelity to the record.
These are kindergarten-level rules for communication.
They are the guardrails that keep disagreement honest and you can't remove them just because you hate someone.
It really bothers me this is still even remotely being debated.
If you believe “you” meant a specific demographic, then say that is your read of is statement and make your case.
Walk people through your reasoning.
But do not stuff your interpretation into quotation marks and then wave the punctuation like it proves itself.
It doesn't, and it makes you a lying fraud.
Charlie said, "you"
Not "Black women"
"you"
It’s the difference between categorizing an entire group of people, (racism) and pointing to individual people, as individuals, who benefited from DEI, (not racist).
It’s a massive distinction that seems to have been completely lost on the people who just are itching to call Charlie a racist, when he clearly was not.
It’s even more worrisome that thousands of you don’t understand what it means to put someone’s words in quotation.
Because if he didn’t actually say “black women”, then you cannot put it in quotes.
That's how quotes work, which is why quotation marks are important.
You don’t need a degree in linguistics to understand this concept. It’s basic literacy... and also it’s also basic ethics.
If you’re going to frame someone’s sentence as evidence of bigotry, you owe the audience, and the person you’re accusing, the courtesy of fidelity to the record.
These are kindergarten-level rules for communication.
They are the guardrails that keep disagreement honest and you can't remove them just because you hate someone.
It really bothers me this is still even remotely being debated.
If you believe “you” meant a specific demographic, then say that is your read of is statement and make your case.
Walk people through your reasoning.
But do not stuff your interpretation into quotation marks and then wave the punctuation like it proves itself.
It doesn't, and it makes you a lying fraud.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
