By Last week, Professor Jordan Peterson was interviewed by Channel 4’s Cathy Newman and, if you are reading this article then, chances are, that is all the introduction to this sordid affair that you will need. Clocking nearly 3 million views in less than a week as well as 113,000 Likes (compared to 2,000 Dislikes) and just under 55,000 comments, the interview has gone viral.The big problem here, from Channel 4’s perspective, is how easily and deftly Peterson cuts down Newman’s aggressive and infantile ‘interviewing techniques’ – he shows her to be a complete fool.
It is truly invigorating watching Newman try to reconcile (and contort) the Truth presented to her by Peterson with the Narrative she has festering in her mind, only to fail drastically. Peterson recognised this immediately, after years of experience he can smell ideological possession a country mile away.
This is not good publicity for Channel 4 and Ms Newman. Fan edits of the interview mock her, memes such as those below do much more of the same, the comments section of the interview on YouTube question her intellectual credibility and her ability to function as a newsreader and Douglas Murray penned an excellent article deriding the so-called ‘interview’.
The only integrity Channel 4 displayed was when they uploaded the full interview rather than some chopped-up reel of propaganda – a daring act that has bitten them for it.
And bite back it has for this interview has betrayed how ideologically possessed and woefully ill-equipped Channel 4 News is, denying them the right of calling themselves a sincere news broadcaster (not that embarrassing themselves is anything new for them)...
Deputy Head of Digital (Interim) at Channel 4 News, Mike Deri Smith, tweeted out saying “A quick search shows 505 comments calling Cathy a “b****” for how she conducted a single interview. Does that count as critical analysis?”. His evidence proving this claim? A YouTube search of all the comments received showing the word ‘bitch’ had been used 517 times – this, of course, is provided without context so we do not know if the words were actually directed at Newman or not. He also claims “there are worse gendered terms of abuse”. Huh, imagine if YouTube had a setting that filtered out profanity!?
However, I pointed out to him that ‘bitch’ was used 517 times, according to his image and, assuming it’s used once per comment (unlikely), that’s a maximum of 1.4% of all comments using that word (correct at time of tweeting). Read: 1.4% of all comments. Another user pointed out the word had only been used against her once on Twitter this year. In all cases, no proof could be provided showing actual, credible threats, just the occasional puerile indignation.
Ben de Pear, Editor of Channel 4 News, tweeted out the following:
Such is the scale of threat we @Channel4News are having to get security specialists in to carry out an analysis. I will not hesitate to get the police involved if necessary. What a terrible indictment of the times we live in.— Ben de Pear (@bendepear) 19 January 2018
These ridiculous tweets blew-up, flooding the news with the insane spin that Channel 4 was under attack from violent, misogynistic trolls. These gross misrepresentations and outright fabrications have irked even Peterson, who tweeted out saying that calling in security experts does not constitute evidence of credible threats.
As shown in this thread by Twitter user @CheekiScrump, Channel 4 News has gone into full lockdown. They are portraying valid criticism and comedic mockery as threats against the person, claiming they require extra security for fear of violence and repercussion. They are saturating the media with it, seemingly pumping it into as many papers and press agencies as possible to try and convince the everyday person their Narrative is true via argumentum ad populum.
If we scream it loud enough and get as many others to scream it loud enough then, people will accept that Cathy Newman must be a victim of misogynistic abuse thanks to Professor Peterson’s fanboys. This appears to be their damage control tactic. Furthermore, through clever-wording and devilish trickery, they are trying to hold Professor Peterson to account for this fantastical abuse they have imagined. He is guilty by association.
GEE, ITS ALMOST LIKE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ACTS AS A HOMOGENEOUS BLOCK REGURGITATING THE OPINIONS OF WHATEVER PR AGENCY FEEDS THEM THEIR NEWS. pic.twitter.com/aGdWWBMruq— ☢S.C.R.U.M.P. - Call of Bants (@CheekiScrump) 20 January 2018
Do not be fooled into thinking that Channel 4 News is being serious here, they too know there are next to no tweets out there that constitute a credible threat, yet alone vitriolic abuse. In a now-deleted tweet, Anja Popp, journalist and producer at Channel 4 News tweeted out how she and Newman were finding these angry tweets to be ‘entertaining’. Correct me if I’m wrong but, I would not expect someone who requires extra security protection because of a threat to also find that threat so entertaining one would laugh at it. Maybe I am missing something!?
In fact, an analysis found Newman’s feminist fans aimed 30 times more violent and sexist abuse at Peterson and his supporters than vice-versa. Even with such a magnitude at play, the total abuse sent in all directions is so tiny it is underwhelming. It’s almost as if the world is inhabited by ordinary people and not crazy psychos who do nothing but abuse people online.
Yet, almost flying in direct contradiction to her current position, Newman once argued that public humiliation is the answer for sexist remarks, stating it is refreshing to see people “publicly calling out the trolls who are making women suffer. The best way to tackle these people is to publicly humiliate them, I think.” And now, with the boot on the other foot, facing public humiliation for her remarks (granted, they weren’t sexist by design), she has suddenly adopted a new attitude. So much for standing by your principles.
So, to summate, Newman was absolutely slaughtered by Peterson when he was invited onto Channel 4 News (I wonder, does me using the word ‘slaughtered’ count as a credible threat?). Both Channel 4 News and Cathy Newman were widely mocked and criticised for such an abysmal performance. They both failed to withstand the fire and responded with frenzied shock. This too was criticised, weakening the already failing position they inhabited. Any credibility Newman and Channel 4 News had is now lost.
If Channel 4 News and Cathy Newman really want to clear this mess up, they can start by tidying their rooms.