Lesson's not gonna be learned. He got the coveted @rachelgilmore.bsky.social shout-out so now he can ignore the haters.

You did this interview with a much bigger media figure who promised the added draw of controversy and in the process validated his implication that the anti-genocide movement doesn't care about Jews. What other conclusion am I supposed to draw? Also, look up the word "snide."

Kinda sounds like you just shouldn't have interviewed him if you weren't prepared to challenge him on substance.

You validated his implication that we're antisemites and validated him as a journalist by nitpicking minor details as if that's the main problem with his project while validating false claims and inferences.

As I already pointed out it's an invalid inference to accept that the "reported incident" # reflects actual incidents. We know Zionist orgs juke these stats. We know this # includes unsubstantiated "suspected" cases validated at the discretion of cops trained by the FSWC.

bsky.app/profile/ben-...

Or don't dignify him with an interview! If you can't challenge him, stop back. Unless the point is self-promotion over what's actually good for the struggle I thought you cared about.

Try. Make him defend implying TO's overwhelmingly white Jewish pop has it worse than indigenous people. Make him defend platforming the rabidly racist anonymous Leviathan doxxing/harassment account that regularly tries to sexually humiliate activists. Make him defend platforming Meir Weinstein.

...a problem that, this statistic absurdly suggests, is orders of magnitude worse than it is in the US and than bigotry against e.g. indigenous people, Black peoiple, and "Muslim's after 9/11" to quote another claim of Jesse's that Scott didn't challenge.

For context, this is about @youcaughtscott.com validating the police-reported statistic re: anti-semitic hate crimes that underlies @jessebrown.bsky.social's whole argument that he's taking on a real and pressing systematic problem...

bsky.app/profile/ben-...

Cool. Learned a lot about you from this exchange. Peace.

Take the criticism or leave it, Scott. I'm not gonna give you minute-by-minute annotation, but this detail is particularly important because, along with your validation of Brown's premise that antisemitism in his conception is a major problem in Canada, this framed the entire interview.

Yes. Pointing out a minor attribution error in a promo as like your centrepiece critique of his journalism made it seem like the project in general had journalistic validity

Again, in engaging him as if he's a serious journalist you validated him as a serious journalist.

In elevating one minor "mistake" you make it seem like you had no deeper or more systematic critique. Again, the effect was ultimately validating of what he's doing.