Dear lord I don't know why I'm always surprised, but NYT keeps finding new ways of betrayal.

this is superb.

this is fucking perfect

“Writes about IQ and race”—holy lie by omission Batman! And this guy argues that white people are naturally superior and cites higher IQs as his evidence. Pretty relevant to a story about a guy who is probably a Muslim hater. Imagine they interviewed a Nazi to undermine a Jewish candidate!

*not interviewed, used as the main source

"Writes often about IQ and race"... Man, if I didn't already know this guy was a Nazi, it'd have been pretty obvious from that statement.

"writes often about IQ and race" is a fucking wild way to report on a eugenicist and white supremacist

But he does it academically so it's ok. 🫠

shit I thought it was just the normal amount of disgraceful racist drivel from NYT this shit is bananas 😂 what the fuck is happening to rich people’s brains is the fear setting in?

woof academic doing a lot of work in that sentence.

Oh, you know the ones

“Writes often” that gets to the heart of the issue.

Recommend this video for anyone wishing to learn more about these types of people and what they believe- youtu.be/UBc7qBS1Ujo?...

"Academic" Like, i know not all academics are good at their job, many are objectively bad ppl by any measure with a basic definition of badness, but i think we're stretching the category to include some dude with a social media account

to put the whole thing into a simple perspective, one just has to consider the manners in which some individuals like ben ryan depict themselves, even if they lack current credentials or are hopelessly biased beyond any shred of subjectivity "Journalist"

Jordan Lasker is a PhD candidate at Texas Tech University, almost certainly in the Dept. of Cognition & Cognitive Neuroscience. He's a co-author on some peer-reviewed papers, which are normal psychometric stuff. He's only started being open about his eugenics shit recently.

i dont think it’s appropriate to call a source an “academic” when the reason you’re using them as a source has nothing to do with their academic work

Except it’s a descriptor that’s either true or not

it’s not just a neutral descriptor tho. If you describe an anonymous source as an “academic”, the reader assumes the reason you’re using them as a source is related to their academic work. If you’re not using them as a source in relation to their work, then you’re being dishonest

Exactly. I am a teacher, and a Chicagoan, and a PhD, and a sword fighter, and a hobby sailor. If a journalist is quoting me, they ought to use the label that is most relevant to the story they’re writing.

That’s fair

it’s like when creationist quote a “scientist” to discuss the age of the earth and it turns out the scientist is a mechanical engineer

Fair point. Having spent a moment digging into Lasker, he's actually a PhD student in psychology at Texas Tech, and the few peer-reviewed papers he's co-authored on are all in journals published by MDPI, which is a largely discredited "paper mill" publisher. Welp. Great job, New York Times.

Yeah, i was also looking into him after posting. I am fully willing to call those I call enemies as legitimate academics (Jordan Peterson, whom I despise, I would still call one)(see my first reply for what type...), but Lasker strikes me as student wannabe. Neurosci philosophy cohorts attract them.

Yeah, gosh, there's *something* about the field of psychometry that seems to *somehow* attract weird racists. I wonder why that could be... /s

Whats worrying is that, in today's world, he'll probably become a "legitimate" academic after this citation.

It's possible, but honestly it's pretty unusual for a PhD candidate who has six years of publications to have such a dismal track record. It's possible that this blow-up will get in the way of him defending his dissertation, if he's even still working on it.

I mean, some of the more recent ones are published by Elsevier and Sage, and he has a first-author paper in a Springer journal. Pretty standard level of pubs for an advanced student in that field, i think? And I agree the MDPI papers are not a great look, but it is also pretty common

yeah i dont really care about what papers he’s published when the reason they used him as a source has nothing to do with his academic work

I wasn’t seeing those on his Google Scholar profile, which is as far as I looked. In any case, here’s hoping that his whole dust-up is enough that it bogs down his dissertation defense. That’s happened to better people than him, for worse reasons than this.

They show up in google scholar if you search his name But yeah. Someone should maybe ask admin at Texas Tech or his department if brokering stolen data is acceptable behavior for a grad student. I'd prob get fired if I did something like this, and i have tenure scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e...

I was looking at the profile that he created and maintains, apparently. And we’ll see how my weekend goes. I may be “someone”.

And since my PhD is in education but I still work “in the field,” it’s not really possible for my employer to put any heat on me for getting involved in this sorry sort of rock fight.

Well, keep us up to date!

They’re never original. Never cutting new ground.

Absolutely out of control ridiculousness. Who did the due diligence on this article? ChatGPT?