If you’re a long time viewer of your local evening news and are under the presumption that for the past few decades or so, crime and corruption and all sorts of excess gawk and mopery are under way in your town…well, turn off the evening news and go to bed. Chances are that things aren’t that bad.
Media, even #MagazineMedia of the likes of the highly respectable New Yorker will post articles to the web and use click bait strategies to get people to click, engage, and then spread outrage all over their baby bibs.
The article referenced is a perfectly fine, if overly long and overly overwrought discussion by one law school professor about another law school professors Twitter thread about maybe cutting down on the emphasis of teaching the Dred Scott decision of 1857.
I mean really, you’re writing about a Twitter thread (Hey, wait a minute!).
The New Yorker, however, decided to post it to that repository of rational discussion, Twitter, with the posting “A debate has erupted over whether the reviled Supreme Court case of Dred Scott v. Sandford should be excised from law courses.”
Hey New Yorker headline writers! One Twitter thread from one law school professor is not a debate erupting. But thanks for roiling the waters.
Seriously folks, find some other way to get the news.