Controversy Erupts as Wall Street Journal Stands By Polarizing Peggy Noonan Article
Have you ever found yourself wondering when the bots would finally come for the op-eds? Yeah, me neither, but here we are . Picture it: a smoky Wall Street Journal newsroom, editors in suspenders clutching their pearls over the next big disruption—and it turns out, it’s a Peggy Noonan–generated think piece . I mean, we’ve all suspected for years that some columns basically write themselves, but did we really think we’d see the day we could just slap a sentient Peggy Noonan onto the opinion page and call it progress? It’s both hilarious and, let’s admit, a little terrifying . Gosh, should I worry that my next SEO rant will be stitched together by the ghost-in-the-machine version of a pundit with a fondness for Reagan references? Join me as we peer behind the digital curtain where journalistic evolution meets uncanny valley—and wonder if originality just clocked out early this Monday . LEARN MORE.

NEW YORK—Justifying the move as simply the next stage in journalism’s continual evolution, The Wall Street Journal on Monday defended its decision to publish a Peggy Noonan–generated article. “No matter how much you want to hold back the tide, you can’t escape this obvious fact: The future of editorial writing is Noonan-based,” said editorial page editor Paul Gigot, adding that certain turns of phrase appearing in the columns of rival newspapers suggested that other publications had already quietly begun using Peggy Noonan themselves. “She can churn out 700 words of establishment Republican rhetoric with startling speed. And let’s be honest, if a column provides readers with the almost quaint Reagan-era viewpoints they’re looking for, does it ultimately even matter if it was generated by Peggy Noonan?” At press time, several periodicals had reportedly begun experimenting with George Will–generated columns but pulled back after a number of embarrassing hallucinations were found.














Post Comment