controverse : Tweets polémiques d’une autrice du New yorker

New York – 29 Février 2024 – Une controverse éclate autour de Doreen St. Félix, autrice au new Yorker, suite à la republication de vieux tweets où elle exprimait des opinions critiques envers les personnes blanches. L’activiste conservateur Christopher Rufo a partagé ces captures d’écran, provoquant une réaction en chaîne et la suppression du compte de St.Félix. Rufo critique également le manque de condamnation du New Yorker. Cette affaire soulève des questions importantes sur la liberté d’expression et la responsabilité des médias. Découvrez les détails de cette polémique et les enjeux qu’elle soulève.

Hear’s a breakdown of teh information from the text, focusing on the key points and summarizing the situation:

Main Story:

The article reports on a controversy surrounding Doreen St. Félix, a writer for The New Yorker, and her past social media posts.Christopher Rufo, a conservative activist, shared screenshots of St. Félix’s old tweets where she expressed critical views about white people. This lead to backlash, and St. Félix reportedly deleted her account. Rufo then criticized The New Yorker for not publicly denouncing St. Félix and claims he was blocked by the publication on X (formerly Twitter).

Key Details:

Sydney Sweeney Image: The article includes an image of Sydney sweeney at the premiere of “Americana” in los angeles. The relevance of this image to the main story is unclear.
Doreen St. Félix’s Alleged Posts: Rufo claims St. Félix made statements suggesting white people fill her with “a lot of hate” and are genetically predisposed to causing plagues.
Rufo’s Actions: Rufo shared these screenshots with his large following on X, leading to the controversy.
st. Félix’s Response: She reportedly deleted her account in response to the backlash.
New Yorker’s Response (or Lack Thereof): Rufo criticizes the New Yorker for not condemning St. Félix’s alleged statements and claims they blocked him on X.
No Immediate Response: St. Félix and The New Yorker had not responded to requests for comment at the time of the article’s writing.

In essence, the article is about a social media controversy sparked by the resurfacing of old tweets and the subsequent reaction from a conservative activist and the publication where the author works.