By MRA-UK: The final straw was the New Scientist article by Soraya Chemaly, “The anti-social network” (25 July 2015) referring to Ellen Pao’s resignation from Reddit. The sub-title conveys the tenor of the piece: “The gender gap in the tech industry and on line attacks on women are inextricably linked“. I will leave aside that I find this assertion exceedingly improbable (one reason being that on line “attacks” on men are equally common). The salient points are these. Firstly, the article has nothing whatsoever to do with gender balance in technical fields. So how could it possibly be used to support the assertion? Moreover, on-line trolling was not a causal factor in Ellen Pao’s departure from Reddit in any case.
It would have been better by far if New Scientist had stayed out of the fetid world of gender politics. It seems New Scientist are determined to continue with this editorial policy. Essentially similar articles on Ellen Pao’s resignation from Reddit have appeared in the Guardian and The New Statesman. But with these august journals one knows what to expect. In contrast, it is surely incumbent upon New Scientist, if it must enter the gender political arena, to be objective, logical and unbiased. This article fails on all counts.
It would have been better by far if New Scientist had stayed out of the fetid world of gender politics. It seems New Scientist are determined to continue with this editorial policy. Essentially similar articles on Ellen Pao’s resignation from Reddit have appeared in the Guardian and The New Statesman. But with these august journals one knows what to expect. In contrast, it is surely incumbent upon New Scientist, if it must enter the gender political arena, to be objective, logical and unbiased. This article fails on all counts.




