The Corner

Whoopi Goldberg’s Suspension from The View Is Illiberal and Irrational

Whoopi Goldberg at the Vanity Fair Oscar Party in Beverly Hills, Calif., in 2016. (Danny Moloshok/Reuters)

Goldberg’s only crime was ‘being wrong in public’ — an eventuality that is all-but guaranteed to arise when we televise spontaneous political debate. 

Sign in here to read more.

Whoopi Goldberg is being suspended from ABC’s The View:

This isn’t just illiberal, it’s irrational. What Goldberg said was factually incorrect, yes. But so what? Figures on political TV shows say stupid and historically illiterate things every day — including about the Nazis — and nothing much happens to them as a result. What, exactly, was different about this one? Is warmed-over critical theory prohibited now?

And why does anyone care? ABC’s president explained that the suspension was a product of Goldberg’s “hurtful comments.” But who, specifically, was “hurt”? The View is a talk show, and a particularly stupid one to boot. Is there anyone in the world who takes it as gospel? I simply do not understand the mechanism by which viewers are supposed to be damaged in some way by watching an actress make mistakes on live TV. Where is this “hurt”? What does it look like? How long does it last? And how is it assuaged by barring Goldberg from the program for a fortnight? Goldberg isn’t the CEO of American Airlines, or the president of the Historical Society. She’s a participant on a chat show. No one in America is affected by her errors.

In its statement, ABC insisted that “the culture at ABC News is one that is driven, kind, inclusive, respectful, and transparent.” Okay. And Goldberg violated these principles how? Presumably, ABC does not think she’s actually an anti-Semite. That would be absurd. Nor, I assume, is she being accused of hostility or disrespect in the workplace. So what’s the infraction? Once again, it seems that Goldberg’s only crime was “being wrong in public” — an eventuality that is all-but guaranteed to arise when we televise spontaneous political debate. Why have such productions if we intend to police them like this?

Bit by bit, and mob by mob, we are destroying our open culture and the organizations that we have constructed to serve it. Historians who look back on this era will presumably be shocked when they learn that, somehow, the institutions that were supposed to be the most tolerant and resilient — the media, the universities, the entertainment industry — were, in fact, the least tolerant and resilient of all. We can add ABC to this growing list of shame.

You have 1 article remaining.
You have 2 articles remaining.
You have 3 articles remaining.
You have 4 articles remaining.
You have 5 articles remaining.
Exit mobile version