In 2018, The New York Times hired Sarah Jeong to its editorial board. Soon after, the public uncovered a history of tweets in which Jeong had made hostile and often profane remarks about white people. Rather than condemn the tweets or reconsider the hire, the NYT defended her by claiming her posts were “satirical responses” to online harassment, characterizing her approach as “punching up.” This incident quickly became a focal point in the ongoing debate about racial double standards, media bias, and progressive ideology’s increasing tolerance of anti-white sentiment.
Key Figures Involved in the Event
- Sarah Jeong – Journalist with a background in technology reporting, known for openly anti-white tweets.
- The New York Times – Prestigious media outlet that defended Jeong’s tweets as contextual satire.
- Conservative Commentators – Criticized NYT and Jeong for racial double standards and moral inconsistency.
- Progressive Media – Defended Jeong and emphasized identity and context as mitigating factors.
Timeline of Related Events
- 2013–2015 – Jeong posts numerous anti-white tweets such as “white people are only fit to live underground like groveling goblins” and “#CancelWhitePeople.”
- August 1, 2018 – The New York Times announces Jeong’s appointment to the editorial board.
- August 2–3, 2018 – Public backlash begins, especially from conservatives. Her tweets go viral.
- August 3, 2018 – The NYT publicly defends Jeong, citing “context” and calling the tweets “punching up.”
- August 2019 – Jeong leaves the editorial board but remains a contributor.
- January 2022 – Joins The Verge as Deputy Features Editor.
- 2025 – Continues at The Verge, now serving as Features Editor.
Definitions of Related Terms and Concepts
- Satire – Use of irony, sarcasm, or ridicule to expose or criticize stupidity or vices, often in politics.
- Punching up – Satirical or critical expression directed at individuals or groups seen as powerful or privileged, often used to justify offensive speech.
- Reverse racism – The idea that racism can be directed toward historically majority groups, such as white people.
- Editorial board – A group of editors responsible for expressing a media outlet’s institutional opinion.
- Double standard – A rule or principle unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups.
- Critical race theory – An academic framework asserting that racism is systemic and not just the product of individual bias.
Progressive Reporting and Narrative of Events
Progressive outlets like The New York Times, Slate, The Guardian, and Vox defended Jeong. They argued her tweets were a satirical response to racist attacks she had endured online. The emphasis was on context, identity, and power dynamics. According to their framing, Jeong’s tweets were examples of “punching up” against a dominant racial group—white people—and therefore not morally equivalent to racism directed at minorities. Critics were often smeared as alt-right or motivated by white fragility.
Conservative Reporting and Narrative of Events
Conservative outlets such as National Review, The Daily Wire, The Federalist, and Fox News presented the story as another example of left-wing media hypocrisy. They pointed out that if a white person had tweeted in the same manner about any minority group, the result would have been immediate termination. Conservatives called attention to the blatant double standard and described Jeong’s language as overtly racist. Some tied this incident into broader concerns about rising anti-white sentiment and progressive identity politics.
Comparison of Progressive and Conservative Narrative through the Philosopher Lens
Progressive View: Adopts a power-based moral relativism. Racism is redefined as prejudice + power. Since white people are viewed as the dominant group, they are exempt from protections.
Conservative View: Upholds universal moral objectivism. Racism is wrong regardless of the racial direction. The moral law does not bend according to one’s group identity. Hate is hate.
Comparison of Progressive and Conservative Narrative through the Christian Lens
Progressive Christian View (influenced by liberation theology): Excuses Jeong’s language as a product of structural oppression. Focuses on systems rather than individual sin.
Biblically Faithful Christian View: All forms of racial hatred violate the law of God. “Partiality” is a sin (James 2:9), and Jeong’s words reflect the sinful heart described in Romans 3:14. Even if provoked, Christians are commanded not to repay evil for evil (Romans 12:17).
Biblical Reporting and Narrative of Events
A biblically grounded news outlet might report:
“Sarah Jeong’s past tweets exhibit a heart hardened by resentment. Regardless of the source of pain, Scripture teaches that love, not hate, is the answer (1 John 4:20). Her words degrade fellow image-bearers (Genesis 1:27), and the defense offered by the New York Times reveals a culture increasingly comfortable with partiality. Christians must stand for truth, repentance, and the impartial love of Christ.”
Comparison Chart of Reporting and Narratives/Perspectives
| Perspective | Progressive | Conservative | Christian |
|---|---|---|---|
| Moral Framework | Power dynamics determine right/wrong | Equal standards for all | Biblical impartiality and sinfulness |
| Jeong’s Tweets | “Punching up,” contextually justified | Overtly racist and hypocritical | Sinful, hateful, unloving |
| NYT’s Response | Supportive, framed as nuanced | Reveals progressive racial bias | Moral compromise and lack of repentance |
| Broader Message | Identity and context override content | Double standards undermine justice | Partiality and sin must be addressed |
Key Questions and Contradictions
- Why is racial hostility toward white people increasingly tolerated?
- Why are some individuals punished for far milder offenses?
- How can moral relativism produce justice?
- Does the concept of “punching up” justify real hatred?
Data and Forensic Discrepancies
- Jeong’s tweets were not isolated; they were repeated over time and often unrelated to specific attacks.
- The tone was not defensive but proactive, often mocking and dehumanizing.
- No evidence was provided that most of her posts were “responses” to harassment.
Official Investigations and Legal Outcomes
- No legal consequences occurred.
- The NYT conducted no apparent internal disciplinary process beyond issuing a public statement.
- Jeong retained her job and was not suspended.
Media Techniques and Rhetorical Devices
- Progressive Media used:
- Reframing – Describing racism as satire or resistance.
- Redirection – Focusing on “alt-right” criticism to avoid content evaluation.
- Selective empathy – Excusing bad behavior based on group identity.
- Conservative Media used:
- Comparison technique – “If the races were reversed…” scenarios.
- Objective moral appeal – “Racism is racism.”
Public and Political Aftermath
- Jeong retained her position temporarily, then quietly exited the NYT editorial board.
- The episode deepened conservative mistrust of legacy media.
- It became a rallying point against woke racial politics and anti-white rhetoric.
Long-Term Impact on Political Discourse
- Cemented awareness of institutional double standards based on racial identity.
- Encouraged more open critique of “anti-white racism”, which progressives often deny exists.
- Helped push conservatives toward alternative media platforms with consistent moral messaging.
Institutional Capture Assessment
- NYT revealed total commitment to progressive race ideology, even at the cost of moral clarity.
- Legacy media demonstrated unwillingness to hold all groups to the same standard.
- Showed that DEI narratives had captured elite journalistic culture.
Election Impact
- No direct election outcome linked.
- Indirect impact: contributed to distrust in the mainstream press and pushed independent-minded voters toward populist and anti-woke candidates in subsequent years.
Psychological Manipulation & Fear Tactics
- Critics were labeled racist or alt-right to silence dissent.
- Framing criticism as harassment created a victim shield.
- Fear of being branded bigoted discouraged moderate voices from speaking up.
Conclusion
The Sarah Jeong episode pulled back the curtain on a media establishment that defends hatred when it aligns with progressive values. “Punching up” became the moral loophole through which explicit racism was excused. For Christians and conservatives alike, this was a clear sign of cultural decay—where sin is redefined and moral standards are applied based on identity, not truth.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
rob@christiannewsjunkie.com
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
I think the content is worthwhile, but it may contain opinions or language I don’t agree with.
Realize that I sometimes use phrases like “trans man”, “trans woman”, “transgender” or similar language for ease of communication. Obviously, as a conservative Christian, I don’t believe anyone has ever become the opposite sex.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots. You can always send me an email at rob@christiannewsjunkie.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.