“I listen to one episode of this podcast looking at the reading wars. It quickly became obvious that this guy is a standard prog. he describes anyone who criticises Ken Goodman as a “flapping penguin”, something he will no doubt claim was just a joke, but which rather undermines his message of being someone with serious credibility.
He spent a large portion of the podcast attacking Emily Hanford, for reasons, entirely unrelated to the story. He claims, for example that she is a journalist, and therefore, not a reading expert. This, he claims, means she has no right to speak on the subject. However, if this were true, journalists would not be allowed to write about anything other than journalism.
He also claims that she Cherry picks her experts. I am somewhat suspicious that had she chosen the experts he likes, i.e. those who favour good morning, then he would’ve had no problem with the cherry picking.
A large part of this podcast is his histrionic passive aggressive, mocking of her podcast. His time would have been better spent if he had acted like a real academic. He could’ve pointed out parts of the podcast where false claims were made and rebutted them with evidence. Instead, he chose to attack her for being a journalist and having the wrong experts on the show.”
urusainaa via Apple Podcasts ·
Great Britain ·
02/14/23