In the Atlantic this afternoon, Conor Friersdorf addressed the media frenzy over Joy Reid’s past homophobic and transphobic posts:

Friersdorf writes:

And in my judgment, the scarce time, attention, and resources spent on this matter far exceeded anything that could be plausibly justified as serving the public interest. Neither gays nor lesbians nor the trans community is better off for the exercise of resurfacing of old, forgotten blog posts that even their author now disavows. Probing the dubious hacking story got the public closer to the truth—but a relatively useless truth that is neither pertinent to any of Reid’s actual journalism nor civically useful to the public nor likely to advance the overall cause of greater journalistic honesty or accuracy in any future way that I can see.

Most damning of all are the opportunity costs.

A cable morning-show host’s old blog posts, and her explanations of those posts, no matter how dubious, were just not among the most consequential or important LGBT stories, or media stories, or ideological-bias stories of the last fortnight, let alone the most important national or business or general-interest stories.

Wow. Where to begin?

We’d say it’s pretty pertinent. Particularly when they’re asking us to trust them to be honest.

Conservatives just don’t merit the same concern.


It wasn’t even that long ago.

Williamson’s definitely got Reid beat in the honesty department. But the Atlantic didn’t seem too concerned about the “opportunity costs” associated with his name being dragged through the mud until the Left claimed his scalp.