The Poppyseed Bagel
I recently read a guest essay in The New York Times that blamed older adults for many of our nation’s ills.
I liken it to . . . the POPPYSEED BAGEL.
To me, poppyseeds do nothing to elevate the flavor or quality of the bagel—they just make an enormous mess, leaving their tiny, tasteless seeds all over the place. Seeds you’re likely to continue to find LONG after the bagel itself has been consumed.
Not so, the sesame, onion, pumpernickel, cinnamon raisin, or the most controversial (and, if you ask me, least appealing) bagel of them all, the blueberry.
They at least add flavor—and color.
The poppyseed—not so much.
Such was the case with the, “I know ageism is a ‘scourge,’ but . . . “ rant the Times published a couple of weeks ago.
What I find curious is how it got published it in the first place, since it seems to fall short of the standards the paper requires of all Guest Essay submissions: verifiable facts, justifiable broader assertions, sound methodology, primary sources, nuance, and no conflicts of interest. (For the complete list of requirements, click here.)
This essay lacks them all.
While it does contain some facts, these facts tells only part of the story.
They are presented with virtually no context. Context that would (inconveniently, for the essayist) refute the very claims he is making in the piece.
Perhaps that’s because the writer’s goal seems not to be to elevate what should be an important intergenerational conversation; rather it is to drop messy little seeds everywhere that people are more likely to sweep under the table/sofa/carpet than they are to actually clean up.
As for conflicts of interest, I find two.
The first is with the author, who submitted the essay in advance of publication of his book that expounds on the ill-conceived notion that older Americans are “hoarders” of the assets that are keeping younger Americans from “fulfilling their potential.”
This essay isn’t about creating a buzz around an issue—it’s about creating a buzz to sell a book.
The second, and more egregious, conflict of interest is with The New York Times by publishing this type of clickbait in order to pander to the frustrations and deep-seeded ageism harbored by its largest cohort of readers: 29% of whom are 18 to 29, and 34% of whom are 30 to 49.
What astounds me the most, however, is the irony that the author is 54-years-old and a tenured professor at one of our nation’s most prestigious law schools.
Astounding because before he knows it, he will be a member of the population he is now criticizing—and because his tenure means he’ll never have to leave his job, no matter how old he gets.
Will he see himself as a “hoarder”? Or will he come to realize that his essay, his book, and his ageist assertions are simply full of holes?
Time will tell. Meanwhile, they’re simply poppyseeds.