I did myself the favour of listening to the Decca Aitkenhead interview with Jordan Peterson uncut (followed by the conversation with his daughter) on his Youtube channel last evening before venturing to the Sunday Times. It may interest your editors to know it received over 321k views in the first 24 hours, and given the popularity of Dr.Peterson’s channel, millions more are sure to follow.
“I don’t know if this is a story about drug dependency, or doctors, or Peterson family dynamics — or a parable about toxic masculinity. Whatever else it is, it’s very strange. …”
My reason for writing isn’t to ask why your editors permitted such a dishonest and slanted account of the conversation to pass to your pages — that much is self evident in this age of agenda driven pseudo-journalism.
My question is much more basic than that, because what you have done is quite inexplicable.
What on earth led The Times and writer Decca Aitkenhead to believe that her deception would pass unrevealed? Did she not know the interview was being recorded? Or was The Times not aware that Dr.Peterson’s audience reach dwarfs your own?