You wonder why I sympathise with Jordan Peterson over the Cathy Newman debacle? Largely because he is 100% right but also because in November I gave a lecture to the sociology students at Bath Spa University normally taught by my wife. I did not take a fee but wished to challenge them in how they looked at data. Around 70 attended and and I did not hold back. My lecture was recorded as were the slides.
My sister N is the sort of public sector employed lefty whose prime source of information is the Guardian. And since I am about the only Tory she speaks to, for there are few to no-one in her social circle, there is no-one to challenge the lies she is fed by the BBC's sister publication. And thus when I asked her if she had seen the Cathy Newman car crash interview with Jordan Peterson on Channel 4 Fake News she said "I've read about all the abuse and death threats she is getting."
Sadly it is true that a very small number of folk have posted the most vile abuse and threats against Ms Newman. Just as the Left has some vile trolls who post the most hateful abuse against Jews and enemies of the dear leader Mr Corbyn, we on the right have our arseholes too.
Thus Channel 4 News has branded critics of Ms Newman as misogynists and said it has called in its security experts. The fact is that 99.9% of her critics, including my own wife, a Guardian reading lefty, criticise Newman because her performance was just so dreadful. We have every right to point out that a presenter earning a six figure salary at a State owned broadcaster has recorded an interview which is so toe-curlingly bad and that it demonstrates the mentality and intellectual vacuum at the heart of the liberal media establishment.
Yet the few vile threats allow C4 to move the narrative. The story is now one of trolls, harassment and the loony right. For folks like N that is all that they will read and know of the incident. My sister is bright enough to watch the whole video and I hope that she will see that there is far more to this story than Channel 4 and the Guardian would have her believe. Sadly others will not watch the video and will conclude that Cathy is just another victim of we evil folks who do not follow JC as he seeks to build a new Venezuala.
On C4 Fake News Newman introduced the Prof as a "hero of the Alt Right". Alt Right started as a term which was very specific in the US and liberals quickly started to use it as interchangeable with racist, bigot, fascist etc. And by implication they thus argued that anyone who was a hero of the Alt Right must also be a racist, bigot, fascist etc. As it happens Jordan is a hero of many folks on the centre and right for the way he shows how data can be used to mislead. But for folks like Newman anyone to the right of Kenneth Clarke is more or less Alt Right. So she introduced the interview with a smear.
What followed was 30 minutes of comedy. Time and time again Peterson would make a point. Newman would respond by stating that he had said something completely different and accused him of bigotry on that basis. Hence at 5 minutes 40 seconds she says "so you deny the gender pay gap". Of course Peterson had denied nothing of the sort - and this seems all to close to home for me with recent events at Bath Spa - he merely stated clearly that there are a number of facts that explain the gap of which gender is only one.
The interview is full of such classics from Newman " Why shouldn't women have the right to children" she asks. Natch Jordan had never said they did not. "You're saying (gender) equality won't happen" Cathy asserted. Jordan had said nothing of the sort. At 27 minutes in there is a superb segment on lobsters in which Newman asserts " You are saying we should organise our society along the lines of lobsters." It goes without saying that Jordan Peterson had said absolutely nothing of the sort.
At one point, after another ludicrous made up assertion from Newman, Peterson noted that her comments were made "because you are not listening.". At around 23 minutes on the matter of free speech which Peterson believes in for all, but Newman believes in only selectively, Peterson actually managed to silence his harpie interregator with a question she could not answer.
You might think that Newman's string of ludicrous bogus assertions and failure to grasp hard data is a sign that she is very stupid. That would be a mistake, she is not. Like nearly all the media liberals she is a product of public school ( Charterhouse) and Oxbridge ( dark blue). She is clever. Her problem is that she is liberal media establishment to the core. It is in her DNA. Thus she does not believe in free speech where it challenges her core beliefs and she will not listen to those who advance arguments or produce data which really threaten those beliefs. And it was actions driven by that mindset which left her looking so remarkably stupid in the interview below.