[teejers1]

As for whataboutism, I find it rude if people intentionally redirect from a serious, important topic. If people are coming together, discussing, and mourning a tragedy in America, I think it's rude -- say, in the middle of a moment of silence or taking a knee -- to switch subjects to some other tragedy. It's like talking about someone else who died during a person's funeral, intentionally trying to redirect from the funeral you are attending at that moment.

But as for bringing up Tucker Carlson, if someone is claiming the NYTimes's coverage of an allergic response by a healthcare worker in Alaska to the Covid vaccine was being irresponsible and sensationalistic, I think it's fair game to bring up an actual example of irresponsible and sensationalistic coverage of that same allergic response by the same healthcare worker in Alaska. I think that's very on-topic.

???

Just to be clear: my example of bringing up "what if" taking a knee was about abortion and not police brutality was NOT to question whether police brutality is a "serious, important topic."  Rather, it was offered to test whether one thinks it was appropriate for the NFL to essentially blackball Kaep for doing so.  The idea, of course, is to test the principle behind those condemning the blackballing.  Do you object to running Kaep out of the league because he was using the platform he had to raise an issue important to him?  Or do you only object to that because you share Kaep's belief that police brutality is a serious issue?  The former is a principled decision; the latter is less so.  

I thought that was clear in my initial post, but evidently not.   

As for raising Carlson, that seemed like a reasonable extension of the discussion.

[teejers1]

As for whataboutism, I find it rude if people intentionally redirect from a serious, important topic. If people are coming together, discussing, and mourning a tragedy in America, I think it's rude -- say, in the middle of a moment of silence or taking a knee -- to switch subjects to some other tragedy. It's like talking about someone else who died during a person's funeral, intentionally trying to redirect from the funeral you are attending at that moment.

But as for bringing up Tucker Carlson, if someone is claiming the NYTimes's coverage of an allergic response by a healthcare worker in Alaska to the Covid vaccine was being irresponsible and sensationalistic, I think it's fair game to bring up an actual example of irresponsible and sensationalistic coverage of that same allergic response by the same healthcare worker in Alaska. I think that's very on-topic.

???

Just to be clear: my example of bringing up "what if" taking a knee was about abortion and not police brutality was NOT to question whether police brutality is a "serious, important topic."  Rather, it was offered to test whether one thinks it was appropriate for the NFL to essentially blackball Kaep for doing so.  The idea, of course, is to test the principle behind those condemning the blackballing.  Do you object to running Kaep out of the league because he was using the platform he had to raise an issue important to him?  Or do you only object to that because you share Kaep's belief that police brutality is a serious issue?  The former is a principled decision; the latter is less so.  

I thought that was clear in my initial post, but evidently not.   

As for raising Carlson, that seemed like a reasonable extension of the discussion.