As of June 7, 2023, Chris Licht is out as the head of CNN following a highly critical, heavy-hitting piece in The Atlantic. His departure revolves around the conflicting ideologies of the “woke” movement and the even more recent anti-woke movement. First, let’s address Licht’s situation, and then we’ll delve into the concept of “woke.”
I wholeheartedly agree that Licht should have been removed from CNN. Not because he wasn’t sufficiently “woke” or too centrist, but because he sacrificed objectivity for the sake of appearing neutral in order to profit from the American Culture Wars’ rage machine. I consider this journalistic malpractice and an unforgivable ethical violation. In my opinion, no one is truly neutral on any significant issue, and I’m fine with that as long as I understand the underlying worldview of journalists and find their reporting or analysis fair and objective. I have no problem acknowledging when a conservative or far-left pundit makes a valid point. However, some of you may believe that news should be strictly unbiased with only neutral commentary. That’s fine, but it also comes with greater responsibility. If both positions are equally plausible and reasonable, supported by compelling evidence, and lack a widely held consensus among experts, it’s acceptable to present both sides and let the audience decide. However, giving equal weight to a position that has been demonstrably proven false over and over again is dangerous. It enables disinformation and propaganda campaigns. What value is there in debating whether smoking is harmful while platforming the “science reports” of tobacco lobbyists? The only beneficiaries are people like Mike Pence, who were receiving checks from tobacco companies.
Trump’s denial of the election results was one of the most damaging political stunts in the country’s history and led to a violent insurrection. His claims were debunked by Republican secretaries of state, his own Attorney General Bill Barr, and Trump-appointed judges who dismissed every baseless case that was brought before them. For Licht to provide a platform for Trump with minimal pushback from moderators doesn’t demonstrate a desire to make journalism fairer but rather to make it more profitable. Shame on him. I can be persuaded that the town hall should have been allowed, but it should have been accompanied by pushback and real-time fact-checking that would make the Inquisition look tame. Whether in business negotiations or personal relationships, bad faith changes everything. You cannot make a good deal with a bad person, and if you foolishly attempt to, at least take every possible precaution to mitigate the harm they can cause.
Fox News is a prime example of this. Not only is it viewed as harmful and entirely non-credible by the left, but also by many anti-MAGA Republicans. Even more damning, their own hosts and staff recognize the dishonesty and harm they cause for the sake of profit. Is that the standard we want for all media? Is the only criterion for success the number of clicks generated?
Now, let’s move on to the concept of “woke.” Is CNN, and the media as a whole too woke? Is the left, in general, too woke? The most accurate answer is: I don’t know because I don’t know what “woke” means. I have my own opinion on what “woke” means to me and what I believe it means to different people depending on their political orientation. However, for a serious discussion of any topic from a sociological or political science perspective, technical terms need to be defined within the context of an explanatory theory, just like any other scientific field.
Using the term “woke” without clear definitions and criteria is akin to calling someone a psycho. It means something different to each person who hears it and provides no assistance to a psychiatrist. However, when a psychiatrist diagnoses someone as a psychopath, there is a clear definition and specific criteria that must be met. This is exactly what is happening with the term “woke.” It is being given significance even though it is nothing more than an ambiguous term thrown at anyone deemed too liberal. This is a terrible standard, even in casual conversations, let alone when legitimizing it as a political philosophy. For now, it’s best to ignore the term and focus on evaluating the positions themselves. I don’t care if something is considered too woke or not woke enough; I care about the effectiveness of the idea. As Deng Xiaoping aptly said, “I don’t care if the cat is black or white, so long as it catches mice.” One of my favorite commentaries on wokeness came from Dr. Cornel West: “You can be obsessed with wokeness and suffer from insomnia.” What’s truly insightful about that remark is that it applies to both practitioners and critics alike.
So, what does “woke” mean to me? I believe it applies to individuals on the left who are well-intentioned but hold positions that are on the extreme end of the progressive spectrum, far out of step with their liberal counterparts. However, that’s not my sole criterion. I apply the term when one of these individuals is so rigidly devout in their stance that no evidence can persuade them to change their position. It mirrors the behavior of traditional religious fundamentalists who punish anyone questioning orthodoxy or holy books. Some quick examples that come to mind are hard-left progressives claiming Bernie Sanders is a capitalist sellout because of certain deals he voted for, or describing Hillary Clinton as if she were a member of the KKK due to her use of the term “super predator.” Treating books by Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi as gospel while disregarding the commentary of John McWhorter or Coleman Hughes, even labeling them as self-hating, is unfair. Regardless of how reasonable the critique may be, simply questioning DiAngelo and Kendi is considered an offense. I admire much of what people like Kendi and Ta-Nehisi Coates strive to achieve, and I agree with a good amount of their commentary, but not all of it. I’m also a huge fan of Noam Chomsky and Dr. Cornel West, but I don’t agree with every position they hold. That doesn’t make me or anyone else a right-winger. The same applies to individuals like Sam Harris, John McWhorter, and various other center-left commentators and politicians. To dismiss them because they don’t align with all of your positions or the entirety of your approach to achieving them is toxic. It makes it extremely challenging for Democrats to win elections, while Republicans rally around deplorable candidates. Democrats end up shooting themselves in the foot. Hillary was not my ideal candidate, and Biden is not my ideal candidate, but I would choose either without hesitation compared to what the right offers. You don’t win by losing. Incremental progress is better than regression. It’s better to gain an inch than lose a mile. Even stagnation is better than regression.
We must all be mindful that what we shout out, we are reinforcing. There is also a natural human tendency to double down on bad decisions, look no further than any casino. When people take a strident public position on something, they often become more entrenched in the face of new evidence or stronger arguments because they fear that changing their stance equates to losing a public debate. This is a terrible intellectual standard. We should all be willing to abandon bad ideas in favor of new, more accurate ones. We should be able to recognize valid aspects of an argument without agreeing with the person’s entire position. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. If you genuinely believe that every Republican is wrong about every aspect of their positions or refuse to admit it because you think even the slightest concession lends credence to a bad idea, then you are probably “woke.” If you think Bernie Sanders isn’t worthy of a vote because he’s a corporate sellout, you’re probably woke and your head is stuck so far up your politics you can’t keep your eyes on the prize.. beating the increasingly deranged right. The same criticism applies to the far right and religious zealots, although I have much harsher terms for them than “woke”.
Leave a Reply