Sarah Jeong Lesbian

🛑 👉🏻👉🏻👉🏻 INFORMATION AVAILABLE CLICK HERE👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

'As a woman of colour on the internet, I have faced torrents of online hate,' says writer
Find your bookmarks in your Independent Premium section, under my profile
Journalist Sarah Jeong speaks at Connected Futures Conference
Sarah Jeong, a technology journalist hired by the New York Times and vilified online for tweets comparing “dumbass f****** white people” to dogs and saying they would “all go extinct soon”, has been targeted for harassment by dishonest trolls, her former employer has claimed.
Editors at The Verge, an online tech magazine, denounced what they called “disingenuous” criticism of Ms Jeong by “people acting in bad faith”. The senior writer had been the victim of a Gamergate-style campaign designed to “divide and conquer by forcing newsrooms to disavow their colleagues”, they suggested.
Ms Jeong, 30, posted a string of offensive and apparently racist messages including “#CancelWhitePeople” and “white men are bulls***” up to five years ago. One tweet read: “Dumbass f****** white people marking up the internet like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”.
After being uncovered they quickly spread and were picked up by conservative media including the Daily Caller and Gateway Pundit websites.
Ms Jeong claimed the tweets were “counter-trolling” in response to “torrents of online hate” she had routinely received due to being a non-white woman online. Examples she gave included a tweet calling her a “dog-eating gook” and another that said: “If I saw you, I would sock you in your lesbian face.”
In a statement, she added: “While it was intended as satire, I deeply regret that I mimicked the language of my harassers. These comments were not aimed at a general audience, because general audiences do not engage in harassment campaigns.
“I can understand how hurtful these posts are out of context, and would not do it again.”
Since the tweets were uncovered she has suffered a wave of abuse, including racist language. The Verge issued a lengthy statement attacking those targeting Ms Jeong, saying that during her tenure she had “produced remarkable journalism, including difficult reporting on victims of harassment and abuse”.
The site said that “the trolls engaged in this campaign are using the same [disinformation] tactics that exploded during Gamergate”, a misogynist campaign that deluged female writers with death and rape threats over their coverage of video games.
Male gamers who disagreed with criticism that was anchored in feminism posted writers’ real-life details online, hacked their social accounts and more.
The Verge said: “From cries about ‘ethics in journalism’ to ‘fake news,’ journalists have been increasingly targeted by people acting in bad faith who do not care about the work they do, the challenges they face, or the actual context of their statements.
“Online trolls and harassers want us, the Times, and other newsrooms to waste our time by debating their malicious agenda. They take tweets and other statements out of context because they want to disrupt us and harm individual reporters.
“The strategy is to divide and conquer by forcing newsrooms to disavow their colleagues one at a time. This is not a good-faith conversation, it’s intimidation.
“So we’re not going to fall for these disingenuous tactics. And it’s time other newsrooms learn to spot these hateful campaigns for what they are – attempts to discredit and undo the vital work of journalists who report on the most toxic communities on the internet.”
Ms Jeong has been appointed to the Times’ editorial board as its lead technology writer.
In a statement addressing the backlash the paper said it had “had candid conversations with Sarah as part of our thorough vetting process” including a review of her social media history.
“Her journalism and the fact that she is a young Asian woman have made her a subject of frequent online harassment. For a period of time she responded to that harassment by imitating the rhetoric of her harassers,” it added.
“She sees now that this approach only served to feed the vitriol that we too often see on social media. She regrets it, and the Times does not condone it.”
The Times’ decision to stand by Ms Jeong contrasted with its approach to hiring Quinn Norton earlier this year, when it admitted it had not reviewed her previous social media activity.
In that case, old tweets surfaced in which Ms Norton used racial and homophobic slurs and declared her friendship with a neo-Nazi. Ms Norton, who also writes about online culture, called the backlash to her messages “context collapse”.
Following the furore over Ms Jeong’s tweets, Ms Norton posted: “I don’t think @nytopinion made the right call firing me, though I understand that they panicked, and don’t bear them ill-will, at all, really. But I hoped they have learned to only fire people for cause, not social media fishing for out of context tweets.”

Sarah Jeong is not going to be the latest victim of tweet mining.
The New York Times hired the tech writer recently, as part of an attempt to expand their audience among young news consumers. Her detractors quickly produced a mountain of tweets full of venomous racism.
Here’s the link to the story at the Washington Times. Other traditionally Republican media sources have been pressing on it, from the relatively tame Daily Caller and Fox News to places like Breitbart and PJ Media.
Jeong has consistently been spitting out anti-white, anti-straight, anti-police and such messages into Twitter, full of obvious hate and racism. The New York Times has decided to retain her anyway, fueling questions about whether the decision shows a double standard.
“Part of the reason it was so easy for the outrage to be manufactured in the first place was it was completely decontextualized and ahistorified,” said Nolan L. Cabrera, an associate professor at the University of Arizona who will publish a book in the fall about racial attitudes held by white college students. “Then it was easy to drum up anger and say it looks like she hates white people. That only makes sense if you are willfully ignorant of 400 to 500 years’ history and contemporary social context and also the context from which the tweets were sent.”
It is likely true, as many have pointed out, that if any minority group were substituted in the place of white people into Jeong’s statements, she would not have kept her job. Some edited Jeong’s tweets to hammer home that idea, replacing the words “white people” in her tweets with “black people” and “Jewish people.”
But Cabrera said the idea was “a complete false equivalence,” noting that whiteness isn’t a cultural identity the way being black, Japanese American or Jewish is. Cabrera listed off examples of government policies that targeted various racial groups, including the Chinese Exclusion Act and Operation Wetback, calling racism a “systemic reality” that necessarily favors white people.
Simply put, “white people” aren’t really a group, and any racism displayed against them is different from racism against other groups because they have more inherent power.
This is a serious flaw in the “social justice” mindset. “People” of any stripe are one a convenient group for trend analysis. For specific cases, the context is all that matters. When someone is victimized because of their skin color they are still a victim; the notion that someone unconnected to them is not a victim should mitigate that fact is ridiculous. A person who has never been robbed but lives in a robbery-heavy city is not worse off than the only person in a crime-low suburb who has had most of their accumulated wealth and mementos stolen.
A much more direct defense was offered by Vox:
Once Jeong’s hiring was announced, her detractors immediately started digging through her internet history to see what they could find. A survey of Jeong’s past commentary on Twitter reveals several mainly sarcastic tweets dating back to 2013, which were largely discussing and responding to the oppressive mentality of white culture.
On Thursday morning, Jeong issued a statement. As a female journalist on the internet as well as a woman of color, she is no stranger to harassment — as she herself noted before explaining that in the tweets being circulated as proof of her supposed “racism,” she had been engaging “in what I thought of at the time as counter-trolling.”
Thus, it’s simply an analysis of white culture and counter-trolling. Addressing the second issue first, “counter-trolling” regularly by expressing racist comments simply exposes an otherwise hidden racism. Her responses aren’t even equivalent in many cases; when she is attacked by someone for being a lesbian, she responds by attacking his skin color.
Worse, the “discussion of the oppressive mentality of white culture” is a fundamentally racist construct. Whether it has been accepted as fact by many stripes of academia or, even, if it is factually based – a position with which I strongly disagree – it remains a racist construct.
Recall what was said above about the “social justice” mindset. Even if “white culture” (mind, as referenced in the Washington Post article above, there is no “white culture” if the attacks are made about whites in general, merely an accumulation of separate white cultures) is fundamentally oppressive, individual white people within it are not automatically representative of it… yet her tweets promote that viewpoint in the most simplistic, hateful way.
None of this excuses the attacks that have come her way which triggered many of her responses. It also doesn’t excuse the Republican political columnists and pundits who have carefully excised all of the comments to which she was responding, although one can see from many of the stories, like the one in the Washington Times, above, how most of the tweets were posted “in response to”. It is reasonable to ask what the comments were to which she was responding.
The context is important, because when you see someone being attacked with slurs, their response using abusive language is seen as more understandable. Still wrong, but less likely to induce outrage. Removing the context also gives her supporters the chance to fraudulently present all of her statements as reactive, because some of them are.
At least, you can see the lack of context in some of the stories. Media sources that aren’t traditionally Republican have been covering it differently, like the BBC and the LA Times. In those, the controversy is addressed, but her tweets are not presented at all.
The tweets are important, because if it is just kept as “alleged racist tweets” the reader is missing out on the joyful vitriol of “F** white women” and images of police getting violently beaten. Jeong’s racist and abusive nature is being, well, whitewashed.
Not only is Jeong not being fairly presented by most in the media, but her story is being used to further the cultural divide.
Any opinions expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this website or of the other authors/contributors who write for it.
Ex-Navy Reactor Operator turned bookseller. Father of an amazing girl and husband to an amazing wife. Tired of willful political blindness, but never tired of politics. Hopeful for the future.
by Tiff in Biden Tweets (Open Thread) 49 Comments
Copyright © 2021 | MH Magazine WordPress Theme by MH Themes

Shemale Fucking Teen Man Homanadr
Vintage Handjob Compilation
Http Www Xvideos Com K Big Boobs
Small Breasted Teen
Massage Stol Ru
Sarah Jeong (@SarahJeong) | Twitter
Sarah Jeong - Wikipedia
Sarah Jeong: New York Times journalist who tweeted 'cancel ...
Sarah Jeong’s Racist Tweets - thenewsblender.com
Sarah Jeong: NY Times stands by 'racist tweets' reporter ...
☕ The Real Reason Sarah Jeong Was Fired From The New York ...
Sarah Jeong Wiki, Age, Height, Husband, Net Worth, Family ...
Sarah Jeong Wiki, Bio, Parents, family, Age, Married ...
sarah jeong lee
Dear Sarah Jeong: If America Were Anything Like China, You ...
Sarah Jeong Lesbian