>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx fFxhERMYY Is Jordon P

>>9888772
Yeah, as a journalist, this kind of shit is obnoxious. I've had people threaten lawsuits because I mischaracterized a stenciling technique as a print-making technique. We also don't get paid to engage in lengthy debates over email, and it's best to keep things short and concise. That journalists emails look just like the ones I'd send. "How would you like to be described?". If the guy couldn't give me a quick answer, I might just ignore him.

Though this is still on the journalist, you need to ask these questions before publishing.

>>9889220
Do the people you're interviewing get paid? Maybe you should shut the fuck up.

>>9889155

>>9888772
Journalists don't make a lot of money, and it isn't a very successful career choice.

They're also proven to be dumber than the average person. Journalists are basically trash.

>>9889232
let me clarify. Jordan Peterson wasn't the subject of the article, so no, you don't get paid to spend hours debating metaphysics with JP via an email chain.

So yeah, the journalist made mistakes here. He should have emailed JP for his personal identification, or even better, found something written by JP in which he clearly identifies his political position.

But mistakes happen in journalism, and when they do, you correct them. When the journalist apologizes and asks "how would you prefer to be identified" and JP doesn't answer him in the next email with a direct "I would like to be called a XYZ", that's just annoying. Does Peterson want the record corrected or does he autistically want to berate a journalist over multiple emails?

>>9889281
Hold up there fella
>When the journalist apologizes
Never once did he apologize or has he since
>and asks "how would you prefer to be identified"
That isn't how adults who have careers communicate with each other, it's how jaded college freshmen communicate. He didn't even write a greeting or sign it off. It was nothing but a text message. Jordan isn't a super technologically accustomed guy and, as he implies in his response, took it as a sarcastic slight. They were both being autistic in their own special ways

>>9889238
I know that it was a bait thread

Peterson doesn't handle publicity well. His case is the exact reason I don't put my face on the internet or join social networks. Some people handle it well, but some people just break under self-doubt because of the possibility that every word you say might be misinterpreted and there is no direct recurse for clarification.

>>9889233
The end, where he accidentally exposed his creation process, is really just what all youtubers are doing. It's the video equivalent of writing and editing text, I guess. It's always a shock when you look behind the curtain for the first time.

What should actually give you pause is how he changed over the months. His message has become simplified and dogmatic. His demeanor has become weirdly displeasurable (? stern? self-important?). Peterson decided he had a mission and needs to be a public figure, but his naturally introspective personality can't deal. That's what it looks like to me.

The only thing /lit/ should be interested in are his lectures and his book, anyway. Resist the urge to look at the car crash.

>>9889441
>The only thing /lit/ should be interested in are his lectures and his book, anyway.
That's all I am interested in, primarily because of exact what you just described. That's also why I had such a change of heart after watching that, he clearly realizes how out of hand it's all gotten

Wtf lol, literally threatened to sue the journalist in the most jewey way possible

>>9888772
This has nothing to do with /lit/. If you need to discuss this video, how about you log into YouTube or Reddit.