Week of September 27, 2021
new YorkThe latest coverage of The Verge, a collaboration with The Verge, explained how 65,000 workers are fighting back after years of abuse. Bloomberg’s Mark Gongloff wrote, “Ultimately, this is the story of how marginalized workers we call heroes over the past 18 months have had to come together to defend themselves against a hostile city and industry.” Journalist Edward Ongweso Jr. tweeted, “Only a handful of pieces care about keeping workers centered for that long and that long so you can see the infrastructure they are tinkering with to survive despite deeply exploitative and dangerous conditions.” Melissa Segura from BuzzFeed underline the story “concerns both delivery men and the police” and notes that “unequal security is one thing”. Atlantic‘s Conor Friedersdorf OK: “The over-police harm the marginalized, but so too do the under-police. On Twitter, the NYC-DSA Tech Action task force called the article a “must-read in-depth report on the reality of app-based food delivery in New York.” Among other things, this is a full indictment against the Silicon Valley solutionism which ruthlessly extracts value from its workers at all human costs. On September 23, the New York City Council, spurred in part by Los Deliveristas Unidos, passed sweeping legislation to improve conditions for delivery people, including setting minimum wage standards and granting workers the right to use the restrooms of the restaurants they serve.
May Jeong has investigated why the world’s leading international organization cannot stop sexual misconduct in its own ranks. Lizzie Porter of Iraq Oil Report called it is “a must have for anyone who meets the UN, ever”. Lawyer Danya Chaikel wrote that she “still deals with the extent of this horrible behavior and the rate at which the snail progresses.” Journalist and director Mélanie Gouby tweeted, “These testimonies are infuriating, they all come from UN employees. Think about what this means for women in “beneficiary” populations. Jeong’s reports took her to 18 UN staff who had suffered sexual assault while with the organization, and on Twitter, Sarah Pilchick noted, “Hi. I’m one of those 18. There are so many things I want to say, and I will over time, but to start: Thank you, @mayjeong, for bringing our stories to light with so much care. “
In her review of Maggie Nelson’s On freedom, Andrea Long Chu criticized the academic hypocrisy of the acclaimed essayist. Utah Poet Laureate Paisley Rekdal, called him “One of the most interesting reviews I’ve read. I vehemently agreed with some of them, vehemently disagreed with others and loved reading the whole thing. Considering how much outrage intersects with art (and social media), it is really relevant ”, and author Ian Leslie does not have “Okay with everything he says, but Andrea Long Chu’s really writes and thinks of a very high caliber.” Lur Alghurabi wrote, “There are very few things that I love and enjoy reading more than a deeply engaged, elaborate, and critical book review. tell me you didn’t like something, but give me deep arguments, critical thinking, deep reads. Kyla Wazana Tompkins, professor of gender and women’s studies at Pomona College, said: “There are some nice nuanced thoughts here. I would only add one thing, and that is that if you are a person who constantly expresses your ideas of freedom in a way that others feel wronged, you cannot define your freedom as freedom from repressions.
Columnist Jonathan Chait has explained why some Democrats choose to preserve the “strong base” loophole that allows capital to flow from generation to generation tax-free. Representative Bill Pascrell Jr. wrote on Twitter, “It’s depressing to see some of my former colleagues looking for billionaires and telling lies about the tax loopholes the super-rich are using to blind rob the country.” Progressive author and strategist Erica Payne noted that former North Dakota senator Heidi Heitkamp, who lobbied for the loophole, “joins a long, proud group of sold-out Democrats looking for billionaires.” No wonder the Dem. The party is losing workers. Which members of the Sabotage Caucus have already negotiated their next career as sold-out overpaid lobbyists? »And the journalist Daniel Nichanian wrote, “If you had any doubts about what people in the public service were moved, fed by, drawn to public life while they had power – what they choose to do with their platform after they have left office and are more free to worry about the optics is so informative.
Send correspondence to [email protected]. Or go to nymag.com to respond to individual stories.