Josh Benner

Category: Culture

  • CNN host calls Parler an echo chamber. Fails to realize CNN is its own echo chamber

    I was struck by recent comments from Brian Stelter on CNN. In a conversation with Pamela Brown, they criticized the new Twitter-alternative, Parler.

    Stelter said: “People are going more and more into their own echo chambers. More and more into their own bubbles, especially Trump voters. There’s this new social media app called Parler getting a lot of attention. Because Conservatives are leaving – saying their leaving Twitter and Facebook, and going off to Parler because they believe Parler is a safer space for them. What we’re seeing is even more of a bunker mentality from right wing media, and ultimately that is not good for the country.

    Brown goes on to call that a “threat to democracy.”

    I think that’s all very rich. You have a progressive news network criticizing Conservatives for going into echo chambers. They need to look in a mirror. I love that they want to say this is “not good for the country,” when people are making an exodus for apps like Parler because of progressive liberalism, its influence on tech, and its crackdowns on free speech. So then what is good for the country? A nation where the only discourse which is acceptable is what progressives deem worthy? That’s great for a free society and for democracy.

    I’ve heard progressives justify the censorship of big tech as that simply being the free market at work. Well so are apps like Parler and Rumble. That’s the market correcting itself.

    Our society has become an echo chamber for progressive thought. They control the mainstream media. They overwhelmingly control higher education and public schools. Liberals control Hollywood (how many outspoken Conservative actors can you name). The sports industry has gone woke. And so has tech. Social media platforms who were created as platforms which once promoted free speech now have political agendas.

    Don’t get me wrong. Echo chambers are a bad thing. That’s why I regularly get my news from a diverse array of news sources such as the New York Times, Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, NPR, BBC, the Federalist, and Daily Wire. And while they’re not a good thing, all people, regardless of political belief can be susceptible of falling into echo chambers. That’s why I value having friends who have a diverse array of opinions.

    People love to attack the “right wing conspiracies,” but why does no one question the conspiracy theories of the left? We went four years hearing how Trump colluded with the Russians and how Trump stole the 2016 election. People mock the right for questioning this election, but the left was questioning the integrity of the process before the election happened. My point? Both sides can be capable of echo chambers and conspiracies.

    But creating an account on Parler does not mean you’re doomed to fall down that rabbit hole.

    Stelter and Brown can call apps who do promote free speech to be threats to democracy but what they really are is threats to the power of progressivism in controlling what people see and think.

    No, people are not going to Parler just to spread conspiracies. But not all stories which are censored on Twitter and Facebook are objectively false, and people don’t want platforms to dictate what they can post. Secondly, as these sites increased their crackdown of opposing views this election cycle, I think many people have signed up for alternative platforms as a hedge against being kicked off of Facebook and Twitter (I’m not saying I think it will come to that).

    You can follow me on Parler @Joshbenner or on Twitter @JoshBennerBlog

    Thanks for reading! If you liked, please share :)

  • Parler explodes in popularity. Is it a new frontier?

    Just a thought.

    Parler was the most popularly downloaded app this weekend. With increased censorship on social media platforms, many Conservatives have flocked to Parler, a microblogging site, similar to Twitter. (By the way, you can find me on Parler @Joshbenner).

    There’s nothing wrong with new social networking sites, but it’s interesting to consider the explosive growth of Parler in the fallout of the presidential election and in a time with increased censorship online.

    I think about that and I think about other industries (especially in the world of information). Social media sites that used to be free avenues of communication are cracking down on people who don’t agree with their views or face checkers. Trust in mainstream media is at an all time low. We’re seeing other companies that are catering to a Conservative base. There’s Patriot Mobile, who advertises themselves as “America’s only Conservative cell phone company.”

    All of these make me wonder if there could be increased political proliferation in the open market. Lots of companies support and pander to a progressive base. Just look at all of the rainbow logos during pride month. Look at the companies

    With social media, big tech has all but pushed people to find alternatives in a way that other industries haven’t. If left unchecked, we could be at the beginning of that trend. But as people look to alternative media sources, to alternative social networks, will consumers seek this out in other industries as well?

    I don’t have a crystal ball. But I see the incredible political division in our country right now, and think two things: it could. happen. And I sadly think it would only continue to further the political divide in our nation.

    Pride Month Logos

    Thanks for reading! If you liked, please share.

  • ACB’s sorority shows inclusion by apologizing for congratulating her

    ACB’s sorority shows inclusion by apologizing for congratulating her

    Only women who support killing babies are capable of accomplishing things which should be acknowledged in society.

    This week, Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed as an associate justice of the Supreme Court.

    In the lead-up to Barrett’s confirmation, Kappa Delta – ACB’s college sorority – congratulated their famous alumna on her nomination with a Tweet which said: “KD alumna Amy Coney Barrett was nominated to serve on the Supreme Court. While we do not take a stand on political appointments, we recognize Judge Coney Barrett’s significant accomplishment. We acknowledge our members have a variety of views and a right to their own beliefs.

    Reasonable. Trying to tiptoe around the politics. They faced a backlash from pro-choice members who could not believe the sorority would acknowledge a monumental accomplishment of a famous member. As many organizations do when facing pushback, KD folded.

    Where’s the apology for their sisters who approved of the post? The post says that they “began an intentional journey for the betterment of our organization, with a focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

    How is it inclusive to post about a historical moment and then apologize for that acknowledgement when some people get offended? Inclusion only goes one way. It’s inclusive when it includes a progressive viewpoint. But other views are not welcomed at the table of inclusivity. The KD statement went on to say that they’ve been working on “recognizing we always need to have a more diverse group.” And the solution is to ignore a position shared by a large swath of their members in the name of bowing to the outrage mob?

    Again, Kappa Delta was not endorsing ACB. But even acknowledging her ascendancy onto the nation’s highest court is forbidden.

    This isn’t the only such example .

    The Girl Scouts also had the audacity to acknowledge the fifth woman in U.S. history being confirmed to the Supreme Court. Once again, the outrage mob responded.

    The Girl Scouts quickly backtracked and Tweeted: “Earlier today, we shared a post highlighting the five women who have been appointed to the Supreme Court. It was quickly viewed as a political and partisan statement which was not our intent and we have removed the post.”

    Insanity.

    Thanks for reading! If you liked it, share it!

  • Falwell sues Liberty after receiving $10.5 million

    Falwell sues Liberty after receiving $10.5 million

    Jerry Falwell, Jr, the disgraced former president of Liberty University, the largest Christian university in America, is suing the school for defamation.

    In his court filings, Falwell also cites a non-disparagement clause in his contract. Falwell’s lawsuit talks of Liberty’s “abdication of its legal, contractual, and moral obligations not to defame him.” The lawsuit also claims that “Liberty set out to destroy Mr. Falwell’s reputation through numerous defamatory statements.” The lawsuit talks about the wonders of Falwell’s leadership.

    Background
    The major scandal with the Falwell’s was the salacious accusation that Jerry Falwell, Jr was aware of a years long affair between his wife and a business associate. Part of that story is not in dispute. Falwell had previously acknowledged his wife’s affair (but denied the ongoing nature of the affair as well as the allegation that he had watched the two engage in the affair). But at the time, Falwell was already on leave from the university in response to a photo he had posted of himself and a woman at a house boat party with their pants unzipped.

    And before being placed on leave from the university, Falwell had done several other objectionable actions. He had posted a custom face mask which depicted Virginia governor Ralph Northam in a klansman halloween costume. He had lied about attending clubs in Miami. He had called people “stupid” and “idiot” on his social media.

    The biggest bombshell Falwell faced was undoubtedly allegations of his awareness of his wife’s affair but he had already established a pattern of conduct which was inappropriate for the president of a Christian University (or for that matter, the president of any university). Long before these allegations, there were people who had called for Falwell to step down. There had been people who simply wanted an apology.

    Resignation
    In the wake of the reports about his wife’s affair, Falwell resigned from Liberty (and then he didn’t). And then he did. That was another debacle. But Falwell was given the very nice parting gift of $10.5 million to live the school.

    And now he’s suing.

    Response
    I’m not a lawyer. So I can’t speak to whether or not Falwell has a legal case. But a few thoughts come to mind. First, Falwell had previously claimed that when Liberty put him on leave, that this went against the terms of his contract. I consider that clause and his suggestion that he also had a non-disparagement clause, and I can’t help but question why he wanted all of these guardrails in his contract to protect his own poor conduct?

    Again, maybe he has a legal case. Maybe the school will have to pay him millions of dollars. That I don’t know. But it’s shameful that the head of a Christian University would put so many provisions in his contract which so greatly reduced the university’s ability to hold him accountable.

    Second, I can’t help but question the school and why they agreed to all of these provisions and gave themselves so little ability to hold him accountable and provide oversight. Shame on Liberty’s board.

    Third, did Liberty pay Falwell $10.5 million and not have him sign any sort of release or agreement that he wouldn’t sue them?!

    This whole thing is a debacle.

    Thanks for reading! Make sure to like, comment, and subscribe!

  • San Diego school district lowers standards to combat racism

    San Diego school district lowers standards to combat racism

    San Diego Unified School District is the second largest district in California. Their district recently approved major changes in their grading system to combat racial disparities in academic out comings.

    NBC San Diego explains the background for policy changes:
    According to data presented by the district, under the old grading system, teachers fail minority students more than White students – a lot more. During the first semester of last year, 30% of all D or F grades were given to English learners. One in four, 25%, of failing marks went to students with disabilities. By ethnicity, 23% went to Native Americans. Another 23% of failing grades went to Hispanics. And 20% of D or F grades went to Black students.

    Among the changes, if assignments are turned in late, that will not count against a student’s academic score. Grading will not be based on cumulative scores throughout a term but by academic mastery of a subject by the end of a term.

    The policies also lessen penalties for cheating. Quoting from the San Diego Union Tribune:
    Under the new grading policy, when a student is caught cheating, schools must give the student a chance to reflect on what he or she did, repair trust and receive counseling or other help.

    This is insanity.

    Their grand solution to disparities in grading is to lower standards?

    Lower expectations do not help to overcome disparities. Lower expectations do not help the world to overcome racism. They make everyone worse off. Basic academic expectations such as not cheating and turning things in on time help to prepare people for life in the real world. Because in life, there are consequences for cheating. In life, there are consequences for not making deadlines. In life, your performance matters.

    On paper, that might show some improvements in these academic disparities. But at what cost? Are these making people perform at a higher level? It seems like this could far more easily have people performing at an even worse level. They’re removing basic consequences of student’s actions. On paper, grades might be better, but if they’re doing a worse job of preparing people for the real world, I ask of what value that is.

    Part of the heart behind these changes is that some students can come from dysfunctional homes and study academically. That is a sad reality. And I recognize that there is not an easy solution to these issues. But in lowering standards to boost grades, that doesn’t change the risk of harmful unintended consequences.

    Also, I question how these policies are themselves not racist? In focusing on late assignments or cheating, they say that it’s healing to fight racism to eliminate these policies? It’s the racism of low expectations.

    Thanks for reading! Make sure to like, comment, and subscribe!