= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on [Link] Op-Ed on Brussels Attacks - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (52)
I'm not as certain as pianoforte611 is that you don't know how politics works, but while I agree that having a political op-ed published in a major newspaper is evidence that you understand politics, I don't think it's tremendously strong evidence. If you write something that will appeal to the paper's readers, or that will arouse controversy and draw in readers (or, online, clicks on advertisements), then that may be all they care about. There is some pretty stupid stuff published in major newspapers.
I agree it's not tremendously strong evidence. Having multiple op-eds published in multiple papers, as I have, provides more evidence, of course.
Yup, there is stupid stuff, but it's most often by specific writers who they know and specifically frame as controversial, for example a prisoner on a hunger strike in California. They generally don't publish stupid stuff by people who are positioned as experts. Papers do have a reputation to uphold.