Don’t see the defense of Click in either one-what am I missing?
-
-
Replying to @Profepps
Cobb's essay was the day after the incident--he doesn't mention her but is clearly talking about free speech issues at Missouri.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Profepps
What don't you see? A mention of Click specifically?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @Profepps
A day after a state official commits an act of censorship thru a violent threat, to say, "now's a good time to rethink free speech anyways" is to defend her, basically.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AlexParkerDC
Without wanting to be contumacious, that’s pretty thin gruel.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Profepps
What would be the other point of making that statement at that moment, then? What thought was being conveyed?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AlexParkerDC
“Her actions were defended by pundits.” That seems to have dwindled to “One pundit not mentioning her said something not sufficiently hostile.” As I say, thin gruel as analysis of a press trend.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Profepps
You didn't answer my question. What did Cobb and Gay mean, if not to defend Click?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Tbh I didn’t seen any defense of her. That it’s somehow hidden between the lines is hard for me to credit. So I think the idea that “pundits” rushed to her defense seems not justified by the evidence. We disagree which is fine.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.