Wall Street Journal Opinion Editor Defends Item on Dr. Jill Biden

[Eugene]

Source: New York Times

Wall Street Journal Opinion Editor Defends Item on Dr. Jill Biden

“There’s nothing like playing the race or gender card to stifle criticism,” Paul A. Gigot said as he accused Democrats of orchestrating a coordinated response to an op-ed piece.

By Marc Tracy
Dec. 13, 2020

The editorial page editor of The Wall Street Journal accused strategists for President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr. of instigating a coordinated response to an op-ed article published Friday evening that called on Jill Biden, Mr. Biden’s wife, to refrain from referring to herself as “Dr. Biden” because she is not a medical doctor, but rather holds a doctorate in education.

After earning two master’s degrees, Dr. Biden received her doctorate in 2007 from the University of Delaware. She also taught English at a community college in Virginia, and has said she hopes to continue doing so while serving as first lady.

“The Ph.D. may once have held prestige, but that has been diminished by the erosion of seriousness and the relaxation of standards in university education generally,” Joseph Epstein wrote in the op-ed item.

In the response, published Sunday evening and for Monday’s newspaper, Paul A. Gigot, the top editor for The Journal’s opinion section for nearly two decades, pointed to negative notes about Mr. Epstein’s article posted to Twitter by two Biden staff members as well as Douglas Emhoff, the husband of Senator Kamala Harris, the vice president-elect, as evidence of a campaign.

“Why go to such lengths to highlight a single op-ed on a relatively minor issue?” wrote Mr. Gigot, who elsewhere said the responses reflected “what was clearly a political strategy.” “My guess is that the Biden team concluded it was a chance to use the big gun of identity politics to send a message to critics as it prepares to take power. There’s nothing like playing the race or gender card to stifle criticism.”

-snip-

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/13/business/dr-jill-biden-wall-street-journal.html

[bullimiami]

1. that should be cause for dismissal. after all this trump bullshit to feign ignorance and to

conjure up a coordinated conspiracy of false outrage is vile.

his excuses exacerbate his situation and call into question his motives.

wsj and this editor had every right to decide to publish whatever editorials they want.
responses are part and parcel with the publishing of opinions.

he should have either remained silent or defended his right to publish opinions that may be offensive to some and invite the responses. to attack the responses and conjure conspiracy theories of his own are not acceptable.

[The Genealogist]

2. He just didn't like getting called out for his misogyny

As usual, men like this one has his fee-fees hurt by someone calling him out. Don't people know that he is a man and what he says goes, without any sass back?

[greymattermom]

3. So that is their policy now?

Look for mentions of other PhDs. Dr. Martin Luther King? Dr. Henry Kissinger? I was called "Dr." at work for my whole career. A few people outside work, including Jon Ossoff, call me "Professor". So maybe Dr. Biden should be Professor Biden at the WSJ?

[PJMcK]

4. To the WSJ

It's not really that your OpEd writer dismissed Dr. Biden's academic and professional accomplishments. The whole opinion piece was derogatory and was meant to diminish her standing.

I suggest the WSJ compare Dr. Biden with Mrs. Trump, who was a pornographic model of little accomplishment. Further, Mrs. Trump has done next to nothing as First Lady.

Yeah, but let's bash Dr. Biden because... well, she's a Democrat.

The WSJ sucks.

[handmade34]

5. silly man...

in this case there is cause for criticism so it need not be stifled... maybe he means they want to stifle discussion, but that is silly as well because if you want honest discussion about a matter, you do not target a person, you offer up an argument to discuss...

there is NO justification for Joseph Epstein's opinion piece or the defending of it

[lark]

6. I thought the WSJ still had a tiny shred of integrity, clearly I was mistaken.

They are now the devil, fully in line with all the other proto-fascists trying to pull down any woman who doesn't bow down to their right wing cant.