Hasan Piker’s record of extremism is no secret. So why are media outlets working so hard to mainstream him?
Transcript:
“Hasan Piker is not the enemy,” insisted Ezra Klein in the New York Times.
“Why do elite Democrats fear Hasan Piker?” wondered the Guardian.
Let’s see.
Piker: America deserved 9/11, dude.
Oh my God, well, Hezbollah is a terrorist organization? Dog. If Hezbollah is a terrorist organization, America is the top terrorist organization. Which it is, by the way. America is the top dog in terrorism.
It doesn’t matter. Doesn’t matter if f***ing rapes happened on October 7. Like, that doesn’t change the dynamic for me even this much.
Hezbollah is a paramilitary organization that is also a part of the Lebanese parliament. (“Do we like them or no?”) I think as a resistance group, they’re pretty successful against Israel. I don’t have an issue with them, let’s just say.
Any kind of f***ing Zionist tendency should be treated in the same way as being a f***ing rabid neo-Nazi, if they’ve ever exhibited any sort of f***ing, any sort of positive feelings about the state of Israel.
That’s just a sampling of the extremist statements by the wildly popular streamer whom mainstream media outlets are trying to normalize.
Following an outcry, the New York Times changed its headline to “This is why there’s no liberal Joe Rogan,” an edit which the Times brushed off as “routine.”
But why did the Times think the original headline was appropriate in the first place?
Hasan Piker’s record of extremism is no secret. So why are media outlets working so hard to mainstream him?
See also “Antisemitism, Antizionism and The New York Times’ Defense of Hasan Piker“