I think you need to examine the assumption that Klein believes "the Times’ brand is sullied by biased young wokesters." It is entirely possible Klein believes that the Times' is actually being improved by the new blood, either because he thinks their behavior is popular with the relevant readership who the Times' serves, or because he thinks their behavior is ethically what the Times should be doing and so is worth pursuing despite the disapproval of others. It is very typical of humans to excuse or even encourage terrible behavior when that behavior is being done to further goals one agrees with.
I agree with Hanania. Your theory of Woke takeovers seems intuitively correct. It fits Sapiens. I love the success of Razib Khan as Hanania relates. Has the rise of the Web as a commons brought back some of the dynamic of the late 17th and early 18th centuries? I'm thinking of the intellectual landscape in the time of the founding of the Royal Society.
I think you need to examine the assumption that Klein believes "the Times’ brand is sullied by biased young wokesters." It is entirely possible Klein believes that the Times' is actually being improved by the new blood, either because he thinks their behavior is popular with the relevant readership who the Times' serves, or because he thinks their behavior is ethically what the Times should be doing and so is worth pursuing despite the disapproval of others. It is very typical of humans to excuse or even encourage terrible behavior when that behavior is being done to further goals one agrees with.
I agree with Hanania. Your theory of Woke takeovers seems intuitively correct. It fits Sapiens. I love the success of Razib Khan as Hanania relates. Has the rise of the Web as a commons brought back some of the dynamic of the late 17th and early 18th centuries? I'm thinking of the intellectual landscape in the time of the founding of the Royal Society.