"Since the subject joined the NYT, offsite efforts from conspiracy theorists and their ilk to cherry pick social media quotes have begun. Examples:

example 1example 2example 3Looking at the history page this has already led to some bad faith edits to push an agenda."

"http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/02/new-york-times-editorial-board-just-hired-virulent-racist/ , https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sarah-jeong-new-york-times-hires-writer-racist-past/ , must be 'conspiracy theorists' attacking a sweet innocent woman out of nothing more than bad faith. How dare anyone get upset about racial hatred directed towards whites!"

So because I'm a glutton for punishment, I just recently checked out the Talk page for Sarah Jeong's wiki entry . For those who don't know, Jeong is a left-leaning writer who recently got picked up by the New York Times, which of course means that she's now being targeted by right-wing nutjobs in an attempt to even further bias the Times in favor of conservative voices. As a part of that targeting, the nutjobs have updated Jeong's page to paint her as a racist, which is what inspired me to check out the behind-the-scenes view of things. And, well, you'll never guess what I found - unless you've been paying any attention at all to politics recently, in which case you probably will guess.Here's the first relevant comment:So far, so expected - the right wing has devolved into full-on conspiracy-theory mode, with people like Alex Jones and Trump pushing the most deranged, depraved, unhinged ideas imaginable.* And if you look up "bad faith" in that joke dictionary that everybody is always talking about, you will most assuredly find a picture of some conservative or another.But because we can't have nice things, one of those conservatives comments back:Having been through this little dance a number of times before, I already know to not bother with the "racial hatred directed towards whites" thing, just as I already know not to bother pretending that the Federalist or the National Review are anything but propaganda outlets. As such, the part that catches my eye was the part where this guy put "conspiracy theorists" in scare-quotes. That's a very interesting thing to do, because it turns this whole thing into a war of words rather than a war of ideas: as per the usual, what we see here is a rabid right-winger who's doing everything in his power to convince the left (or, shit, even the center) to lay down its weapons in the name of consensus. In this case, though, that's an awfully comical thing to do, because those three example links in the first comment areIn other words, the use of the phrase "conspiracy theorist" here doesn't come down to a matter of interpretation, nuance, or point of view. It comes down toWhich is funny, right? Because conservatives are all in a tizzy about how we need freedom of speech because that's the only way to have freedom of thought and blah blah Ayn Rand George Orwell something blah blah. But if they truly cared about protecting thought, would they really be going out of their way to vandalize language at every single opportunity? Their actions, I would argue, speak louder.*...outside of organized religion.