To better understand polarized reactions to Trump's shooting, imagine Biden being shot

A "turnabout test" can help us see emotional biases in our thinking

I got another op-ed placed. This one is about polarized, us-vs-them reactions to Trump’s shooting; it asks readers to do a “turnabout test” (as Tetlock called it) to examine how our takes might be distorted by bias and emotion.

Newsweek published the piece. They chose the title, “Us-Vs-Them Narratives Are the Wrong Response to Trump Shooting.” Here it is.

Thoughts on Newsweek’s bias

This might be interesting to some. I’ve known that Newsweek is quite conservative-leaning for a while. Their senior editor is Josh Hammer, who is (to best of my knowledge) an enthusiastic Trump supporter.

I’m generally okay with getting op-eds anywhere, because my main goal is getting info about polarization/depolarization to as many people as possible. After the op-ed went live, I noticed on the Newsweek site they have a pop-up that promotes Hammer’s political views (below), which struck me as a whole other level of political bias creeping into journalism. It’s one thing to have a lean in the articles and opinion pieces you publish; it feels like an entirely other thing to promote on your entire site a specific political view about the “American way of life” being under attack. It does not feel journalistic, or even pretending to be journalistic at that point.

And, for what it’s worth, I’d be just as disappointed if the NYT or WaPo had a site pop-up like “We must defeat Trumpism” or similar. I think it’s the blatant nature of the act that bugs me most because, clearly, many outlets have significant bias but still don’t have more blatant things like this: this is blatant political activism.

This is tough, though, because, like I said, I do generally believe in getting op-eds to diverse audiences and not letting the bias of outlets stand in the way of that. And also, as a society grows more polarized, this will be more and more the norm. This is what polarization does to people and organizations; it exerts pressure on them to “choose a side,” no matter if overtly choosing a side is not journalistic or professional. At this point, I’ll be less likely to submit op-eds to Newsweek — but I may still do it because I think getting depolarization-aimed ideas out there is the most important thing.

What do you think? Am I being overly sensitive? Should I just accept that many outlets are biased these days and focus on getting the word out?

Update: Based on Shawn’s comment, I realized what was bugging me so much about this. It was the fact that Hammer’s political bias/commentary intruded on the experience of reading the article. Someone reading the article got that stuff shoved in their face, which felt a much different and more intrusive way for an outlet’s political bias to make itself known. And that also affects the perception of my writing/work (e.g., “oh, so does Zach condone this outlet’s prominent message?”) Thanks, Shawn, for helping me understand what was bugging me so much even as I couldn’t put my finger on it. Newsweek’s decision basically injects political activism into every piece on their site.