thinking about "professional controversialists", the journalistic tradition of popular writers aiming to shock with their views and the assumption that they are people who could not be writing today because of [waves vaguely towards whining about "cancel culture"] and:

I think we've forgotten about the importance of great prose. Yes, there used to be many respected journalists who held reactionary or even offensive opinions, but they were first and foremost good writers. The whole point of them was that you could read something they'd

published, find yourself entirely disagreeing with them, but still enjoying the way they had laid out their arguments, because they were well-constructed and beautifully written. In fact, the point of them was their talent; their game was too see how far they could lean into

their controversial views by cloaking them in enjoyable prose, and how far they could take their readers along with them through sheer good writing.

I'm not sure what happened in the past few years or decade but that culture got lost somewhere along the way.

The point of controversialists now seems entirely to be...controversy. Brendan O'Neill isn't a good writer; his point is only that he is "controversial". Most of the people who've made a career out of having reactionary opinions about current affairs aren't good writers.

They don't construct their arguments well; they're often irate; their prose is usually flat. That defeats the whole point. This specific type of journalism has become less accepted, I think, because it has lost most of its value; controversy for its own sake isn't

interesting, but crucially, it isn't even entertaining either. Saying that the great writers of yore couldn't do what they did today because they'd get "cancelled" misses the point entirely, because it misunderstands their appeal.

Sorry, just to finish on this (no YOU'RE avoiding a deadline) - it's not a dynamic that's unique to journalism at all, I think. It's entirely possible to enjoy the company of charming and bright people who will occasionally use their wit to express outrageous opinions,

but few enjoy spending time with angry people spouting off offensive opinions non-stop and priding themselves on being rude and refusing to read the room. The controversy is meant to be a small part of the charm, the charm doesn't inherently come from the controversy.