#85 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Sunday July 11)
Good morning and Happy Sunday!
FRANK BRUNI’S FAREWELL
A couple of weeks ago, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni bade farewell to his column, having taken a job in academia. I have agreed with Frank and disagreed with Frank over the years. I use the first name because I feel a sense of familiarity with him. I understand his world view and I respect his intellectual plasticity (the ability to be shaped or molded over time). Indeed, his final column was entitled “Ted Cruz, I’m Sorry.” While Frank doesn’t concede that Cruz isn’t a horrible person, he at least acknowledges that he perhaps overstepped his bounds in his vilification of Cruz.
Bruni acknowledges that it was probably a mistake to follow Trump into the gutter. He notes that there is no nuance, saying “There aren’t as many clicks in cooling tempers and complicating people’s understanding of situations as there are in stoking their rage.”
He saves his most interesting comments for free speech, writing:
“Take the overlapping issues of cancel culture and free speech. Much of what I read is absolutist: Agonized laments about cancel culture are a cynically overblown right-wing diversion from grave injustice. Or woke zealots are conducting a quasi-religious purge.
I think either can be true — depending on the circumstances and the details, which vary from case to case and prevent any summary judgment…
I think that campuses have gone way too far in quashing speech they don’t like, but I also think that some speech is so intentionally injurious and flamboyantly cruel that refusing to showcase it isn’t the defeat of constitutional principles; it’s the triumph of empathy. No single edict can govern all exigencies.”
Nuance and wisdom…in precious short supply today. Thanks to people like Bruni, we were offered at least a taste of those qualities, so we can recall them when we (hopefully) see them in the future.
THE VALUE OF COLUMNISTS
Bruni is part of a long line of columnists whom I read and admire—David Brooks, Bret Stephens, Gail Collins, Nick Kristof, Russ Douthat, Bill Kristol, and Max Boot. There are others, too many to mention. Say what you will about the politics of each, but they are all journalists. They (generally) aren’t yelling at us, they do research about a topic before writing, they attempt to see the other side (sometimes succeeding; sometimes not). They are fact-checked and edited. They are journalists and adhere to certain norms, conventions and professional ethics.
I have enjoyed David Brooks’s journey of self-discovery and I have enjoyed reports of Nick Kristof’s travels with his daughter. And I have enjoyed the interplay of Gail Collins and Bret Stephens (he who struggles to understand where the conservatives have gone). Most of all, I respect them as “real people” who ply the trade with the respect the profession warrants.
Many of you know that I largely have “tuned out” cable news. Not everything is “Breaking News” and not every story is supposed to be transmuted through the prism of the respective broadcaster in order to fit its chosen narrative.
I keep my televised news to those thoughtful commentators I respect the most. Fareed Zakaria is tops on the list and, for different reasons, Bill Maher ranks up there. And while I like Meet the Press and This Week with George Stephanopoulos (and their lead journalists), I am troubled some on their panels of pundits. Many are just recycled politicians and people representing organizations with clear biases. They of course have their standards, not descending into the realm of cable news (and Fox, of course, in particular). It used to be that panels of pundits were panels of other journalists. Now it seems that every losing politician, like Rick Santorum, is provided a stage to “analyze” a speech (as if his position isn’t known and we all couldn’t write it for him, even before a speech or press conference is given).
So I’ll stick to the Sunday Morning analysis. And read more, watch less.
Happy Sunday,
Glenn
From the archives: