damn sign me up for this important journalism pic.twitter.com/hw4P9BFxv2
— homodox (@diequalder) February 17, 2022
The New York Times yesterday began running an ad featuring a relatively new subscriber, someone with on-board edgy ideas and opinions we should want to emulate by buying a subscription as well, who thinks Harry Potter is best understood at a distance from the work’s human point of origin. Because, y’know, the author is “murdering” transgender people with her bigotry, a message now reported in The Times as a news-premise, something demonstrated or proven and not in need of discussion or evidence.
If one knew none of the facts of the controversy, this screenshot alone I think should be enough to demonstrate both the herd mentality of those condemning J. K. Rowling and the justice of her unpopular stand against transgender overreach with respect to safe spaces for women and hurried transitions of children and adolescents with gender issues. Not to mention it’s also being sufficient reason to unsubscribe from The New York Times.
Lianna and other readers of The Times need to re-read the relevant chapters of Order of the Phoenix and maybe think about switching over to The Tatler as their news source. A better tagline for this ad, a more truthful one, would be: “Lianna is now reading The Daily Prophet as a subscriber and accepting it’s subliminal double-think messages uncritically.”
Tomorrow, I’ll explain why I think Lianna, if she wasn’t a pawn on the Woke chessboard, would be right in trying to read Harry Potter through any lens other than the biography and beliefs of J. K. Rowling, that separating the texts from The Presence may be the best way forward in grasping their artistry, meaning, and popularity. Cheers!
A supposedly liberal newspaper whipping up a Two Minutes Hate against a writer for commercial gain – how utterly repellent. pic.twitter.com/K2BVKu6tNA
— Tom Holland (@holland_tom) February 18, 2022
Hey we stuck some cult bullshit about @jk_rowling into the @nytimes ad but I'm sure no will notice, right? https://t.co/CHu3Q1B3Aq
— Jonathan Kay (@jonkay) February 18, 2022
i wish they’d just say they hate harry potter and move on instead of just pointing out everything they think is wrong with Jo and the books.
I saw an article quoting Liana re. “imagining Harry Potter without its creator” – and a tweet by Joyce Carol Oates in response: “shocking condescension. we are trying to imagine the
N Y Times without its marketing dept., without its editors, without its owners, without its Op-Ed columnists & without its loyal subscriber base.”