Support NeoGAF

[PSlayer]

So this interview seems to have exploded in popularity in the last couple of days,even spawning memes about the way Cathy Newman handled the conversation, so i decided to post here to see what you guys think about it.

Personally i don't think Cathy Newman was prepared to interview Professor Peterson. She spent a good chunck of the interview trying to twist what he said instead of listening. It feels like she had an idea of who he was based on other people's opinions about him instead of actually looking after who he was or what he actually says in his lectures and this pushed her into a strawman strategy.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

Typical modern leftist / feminist. Starts with the presumption that she is objectively right on all matters, and so doesn't even want to have an honest debate or hear alternate viewpoints. Instead goes straight to character assassination 101.

 

[highrider]

Regardless of what you think of Peterson, he’s a smart dude. She was woefully unprepared for having a conversation and was more looking for hot takes. Most media does this, but tbh there is so much more to be gained in these discussions if you aren’t starting from an adversarial tact on everything.

 

[TTOOLL]

Dude is incredible, very very smart. I love watching his videos.

 

[Dunki]

She comes over as really stupid and brainwashed by some ridiculous ideology. I have the feeling she just does not even listening to him but try to push her agenda uintil he would snap. Luckily He is way smarter than her so it never happens.

 

[ThisGuy]

I would have much preferred someone in the same wheel house as him debating. She didn't seem prepared, and the twisting of his words/putting words in his mouth does not do her any favors. 24:40 mark was an interesting topic I would love to see fleshed out and debated.

 

[Atrus]

Its clear that the interviewer is too invested in her position and has not reviewed or critiqued her own ideologies enough to warrant having a debate on them. She was unprepared for intellectual, nuanced responses and lost her composure.

 

[Breakage]

I discovered Jordan Peterson last year. I like what he says. Cathy Newman is awful in this interview. Unsurprisingly, all she seems to care about is pushing her Leftist ideology. She isn't actually interested in what Peterson is saying. She just wants to trap him, so she can call him a bigot, misogynistic etc and publically shame him. That's why she's keeps resorting to "so what you're saying is..." to reframe everything he says.

 

[Rocket Number 22]

God, she had some reeeee-setera levels of baiting attempts there lol

 

[Kadayi]

I watched this yesterday and it was pure facepalm in terms of how the interviewer kept taking what Peterson said and extrapolating it into some alternative reality where critical thought goes out the window in favour of spurious accusation again and again and again. Pretty frustrating really given there were subjects that were touched upon that would have been really interesting to learn a lot more about such as the whole Seratonin one, but instead were hurried past by the interviewer because they clearly undermined her worldview to an uncomfortable degree. Dude has the patience of a saint.

 

[PtM]

I would have much preferred someone in the same wheel house as him debating. She didn't seem prepared, and the twisting of his words/putting words in his mouth does not do her any favors. 24:40 mark was an interesting topic I would love to see fleshed out and debated.

Yeah, this was very one-sided.

 

[VAL0R]

Her constant obnoxious misrepresentation of his statements made it clear for everyone that she either doesn't have the intellect capable of understanding Peterson or doesn't have the integrity to treat him fairly.

 

[Vicetrailia]

The agreeable argument is gonna have to be dropped, especially if you conflate it with purchasing. That's more on demand. But more importantly, it still misses issues that have nothing that do with personality. It's not a get out of free jail card, and maybe she made him use it that way, but he used it like a trump card. Agreeable women in the workplace is a 70's thing, but today it's much different. Men hate disagreeable women.

But yeah, her constant strawman additions deflated the interview.

 

[Mahadev]

Typical modern leftist / feminist. Starts with the presumption that she is objectively right on all matters, and so doesn't even want to have an honest debate or hear alternate viewpoints. Instead goes straight to character assassination 101.

So what you're saying is that you hate women?

Dude is incredible, very very smart. I love watching his videos.

So what you're saying is that you support Peterson's misogynism?

But seriously, this interview sucks. I don't even think this proves Peterson right given how lazy and devoid of content her arguments are, it's basically strawman after strawman. She's not interested in debating, she's interested in winning by smearing the other party. It's the reason why before things changed here I stopped visiting the forum, no honest debate just constant relentless attacks against anyone who disagreed with the dogma.

 

[BraveOne]

He mind melts her , its amazing

 

[Dunki]

The agreeable argument is gonna have to be dropped, especially if you conflate it with purchasing. That's more on demand. But more importantly, it still misses issues that have nothing that do with personality. It's not a get out of free jail card, and maybe she made him use it that way, but he used it like a trump card. Agreeable women in the workplace is a 70's thing, but today it's much different. Men hate disagreeable women.

But yeah, her constant strawman additions deflated the interview.

Hating people you disagree with is not a gender thing. Just look at all these femininsts who hate people who do not agree with them. AS for the rest he said that there are tons of reasons who differences but if you only pull the gender card its very stupid and naive. He never neclected the idea that a small part of it also has to do with gender.

 

[Harlock]

When I saw someone at my working watching the video I knew this thing had gone viral. I like the tough questions, but I wish she had more elaborated critic.

 

[lifa-cobex]

She was baiting for a sound bite.
She failed.

 

[Grinchy]

The way she handled this interview was exactly how a typical twitter/forum hysteric would have handled it. Stats have no place among feelings, words being twisted to create strawmen, bringing up the alt-right when things aren't going your way, ect.

It was just embarrassing. He embarrassed her. Who knows what kinds of things are being fed into her earpiece or what kind of pressure she was under to push some narrative, but she got destroyed in this.

 

[dyergram]

So basically what he’s saying is that she should stop trying to put words in his mouth.

 

[Lupingosei]

That turned out really bad for her. I mean really, really bad. So bad, that the interview is becoming a meme now.

And of course, that is not something some people can accept, so the story is now how she is getting attacked by unknown people and is receiving threats. Of course, there is nothing to show and everything is pretty shady, but some of the articles are very well constructed to pin this on Peterson or his fans.

 

[Grinchy]

So basically what he’s saying is that she should stop trying to put words in his mouth.

Oh, so he thinks women aren't strong enough to lift those words up to the height of a man's mouth?

 

[HarryKS]

What memes?

 

[HoodWinked]

this part is particularly devastating (22:12) Cathy Newman is at a complete loss of words because it was such a good argument.

 

[ipukespiders]

Dude is a master of composure in the face of insanity.

 

[Hoya Destroyer]

I saw this interview the other day. I think the interviewer wanted him to sit there, while she threw stones at him. That didnt work.

 

[Kadayi]

What memes?

I don't necessarily approve in beating on Cathy. It was just a poor interview on her part, but it does kind of encapsulate how this particular interview went. In large part I think it serves as a lesson for journalists to do more due diligence in researching and fact-checking their interviewees beforehand versus going in with little knowledge or understanding of their background, work and history.

 

[Blood Borne]

God, she had some reeeee-setera levels of baiting attempts there lol

Lool. So true.
There is no objectivity or logic to leftists ideology, they're solely driven by emotions.

 

[Punchpudding]

I guess I cringe easily when watching people get embarrassed and I had a hard time watching that video. Cathy Newman was just so under prepared it was embarrassing. It seemed like she was overconfident with her pop-facts and has never had to actually defend or scrutinize them before.

 

[Moneal]

this part is particularly devastating (22:12) Cathy Newman is at a complete loss of words because it was such a good argument.

Yea that part was mind boggling. As soon as she said it, I was like well that was a big mistake.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Yea that part was mind boggling. As soon as she said it, I was like well that was a big mistake.

It's strange she did not come with the standard response to this, that he is a priviliged white man and therefore cannot feel offended by anything, unlike a minority. Kind of like how you can compare Bush to an ape, make fun of Trump's skin color but cannot to either to Obama.

 

[Dr. Mario]

It's strange she did not come with the standard response to this, that he is a priviliged white man and therefore cannot feel offended by anything, unlike a minority. Kind of like how you can compare Bush to an ape, make fun of Trump's skin color but cannot to either to Obama.

Er.. you don't need to have empathy skills to understand how these examples are different.

 

[llien]

Very poor journalism. Close to that time he did a Radio interview on BBC5 and two hosts over there were so much better.



I don't have a problem with hosts being hostile, on the opposite, but not only did she not prepare well for this interview, she failed at basic logic and didn't seem to either listen or understand rather basic statements by J.P.

 

[Harlock]

The discussion about the gender gap, where gender is part but not the entire cause, remind me that ESA report last year. It showed that women is half of gamer demographic, but never break out by platform or kind of game. You only put the broad aspect, but never go after the single aspects. Become a very ineffective talk.

 

[nephilimdj]

Our life span development book at uni was 400 odd pages, with 2 lines on each page with 1000 odd references, really the topic is crazy complex and is very frustrating when people argue with 1 study or something clearly written by a undergrad

 

[Lupingosei]

I don't necessarily approve in beating on Cathy. It was just a poor interview on her part, but it does kind of encapsulate how this particular interview went. In large part I think it serves as a lesson for journalists to do more due diligence in researching and fact-checking their interviewees beforehand versus going in with little knowledge or understanding of their background, work and history.

She did not because she lives in this bubble where they can "expose" different opinions without any problem. Now she faced somebody who would not just roll over and the thing that worked in the bubble falls apart in real life within seconds. Why do you think people want these closed communities on the internet. Because they don't want debate anymore because a debate is actually hard and you have arguments and must be able to accept that the other side may have good arguments as well. But in a black & white world, this is not possible. In her mind, Jordan Peterson could not be right with anything and she had to expose that and she failed.

Now they have to spin this into abuse and harassment. Make Peterson and his fans harasser, not allowing him to show up on TV again not repeating this mistake again.

 

[Kadayi]

The discussion about the gender gap, where gender is part but not the entire cause, remind me that ESA report last year. It showed that women is half of gamer demographic, but never break out by platform or kind of game. You only put the broad aspect, but never go after the single aspects. Become a very ineffective talk.

Well, it's the classic case of looking for the evidence to support a hypothesis and being selective in what's highlighted, versus being open-ended in terms of drawing conclusions once the data is in.

 

[Palantir]

The interview was just an astonishingly bad performance on her part. It really demonstrates the leftist method of argument. Cannot win on facts and rationality, so they must force the narrative. The attempt to cover it up now by overblowing her harassment is pretty bad as well.
Though, I'm sure she actually has received some legit abuse, and I think that's extremely unfortunate. It's fair to call her out for her poor interview but resulting to personalized attacks is wrong.

 

[llien]

The attempt to cover it up now by overblowing her harassment is pretty bad as well.

I'd say, while "attacking" C.N. by assessing her performance to be pretty terrible is definitely within limits and graveness of "RIP C.N." is arguable, "we know, where you live" is clearly crossing the line.

 

[Mohonky]

Lool. So true.
There is no objectivity or logic to leftists ideology, they're solely driven by emotions.

The irony given the posts you've come out within other threads.

As to the interview it was just frustrating to watch. She either isn't listening to what he is saying or doesn't understand the nuance of it. He was clearly pretty clearly articulating his point and discussing the multifaceted reasoning to understand the nature of the questions she was asking but she kept trying to push him for basic yes / no responses to questions that require understanding the underlying bias, reasoning, prospective 'positive' goals and general gender behaviours that all impact her claim or at least what what he uses to substantiate an argument she quoted.

I got to about 20 minutes and gave up tbh.

 

[Mahadev]

I'd say, while "attacking" C.N. by assessing her performance to be pretty terrible is definitely within limits and graveness of "RIP C.N." is arguable, "we know, where you live" is clearly crossing the line.

You're missing the point. There are 3.2 billion people on the internet and any idiot can send a stupid tweet and someone definitely will, handpicking the relatively very few emails/tweets from extremist nutjobs to use as an argument or as an example of Peterson's ideology or followers is fallacious bullshit. You think Peterson hasn't received death threats or hate mail? You know why people like him don't make a big fuss about it though? Because it's neither interesting or relevant to the debate, it's just cheap and easy fearmongering.

When was the last time someone on the internet was killed because of a fucking hate tweet? I'd say either never or close to never. I don't even think the people who make a big deal about them take them seriously, they just pretend they do to promote whatever agenda they have.

 

[Xdrive05]

Wow. This interview. “The right not to be offended” was used seriously by a state media interviewer in the same nation that gave the world Monty Python.

She comes off like every worst stereotype of the Portlandia feminist religious left culture warrior made flesh and blood and feels; just assuming the worst of her opponent and not bothering to know a damn thing about the counter arguments to her coffee table pop bullshit accusations.

Just lazy and feckless garbage.

I hate the current year.

 

[lifa-cobex]

Wow. This interview. “The right not to be offended” was used seriously by a state media interviewer in the same nation that gave the world Monty Python.

She comes off like every worst stereotype of the Portlandia feminist religious left culture warrior made flesh and blood and feels; just assuming the worst of her opponent and not bothering to know a damn thing about the counter arguments to her coffee table pop bullshit accusations.

Just lazy and feckless garbage.

I hate the current year.

I opened a thread years back about John Cleese around free speech.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/john...s-can-lead-to-an-orwellian-nightmare.1177983/
I think my fears have come to pass on this topic.

It really annoyed me when a mod locked it. Tried messaging him/her but got no response.

 

[Nicktendo86]

Cathy Newman is pretty awful. Sums up the pretty useless media we have in this country.

 

[Lupingosei]

Oh dear, it is getting even worse now. The Independent drags now the me too movement into this.

Fortunately, according to the comments, nobody takes this seriously. Some comments are amazing.

Why would she receive death threats?
She was already killed in that interview.

 

[ipukespiders]

Cathy Newman is pretty awful. Sums up the pretty useless media we have in this country.

Yup.

 

[Kadayi]

Oh dear, it is getting even worse now. The Independent drags now the me too movement into this.

Fortunately, according to the comments, nobody takes this seriously. Some comments are amazing.

Seems to be that various media outlets are trying to spin a narrative of 'never mind the quality look at all of these misogynists' based on the mean tweets she got as a distraction from just how poorly that interview went and how it's blown up, and naturally in said spin these tweeters are labelled as 'Alt-Right'/Far right followers of Peterson (without an iota of evidence that that's the case) as well as regurgitating the usual accusations made against him despite the fact that he corrected some in said interview. Honestly, the complete lack of any integrity within news media is getting really wearing: -

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-newman-suffers-online-abuse?CMP=share_btn_tw

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...onsultant-university-of-toronto-a8169401.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/0...fter-interviewing-jordan-peterson_a_23338912/

 

[cubicle47b]

“Cartoon villain.” That Independent article is atrocious.

 

[Lupingosei]

And the point is if there was a believable thread the police would have been involved. But that did not happen, there was even picture of her laughing at the comments which was later deleted. They are trying to spin the story to make this incredible embarrassment go away and to never ever give Jordan Peterson a platform in British TV again.

But according to the comments sections in those articles, it seems not to work this time.

 

[Kadayi]

Unless I'm missing something, the only one that allows comments is the Huffpo one. The others are all written with no option to comment and call them out (another depressingly common media habit).