Should the sexual abuser come forward before the victim decides it’s time?

The recent flurry of sexual harassment and rape accusations naming a myriad of powerful men in Hollywood seems almost like a Zeitgeist. Since Harvey Weinstein exploded into public view there have been new allegations made against other powerful men in Hollywood and other industries almost daily. The courage of other victims coming forward has inspired and empowered Women with similar experiences to share their own story of sexual exploitation and injustice.

There’s no doubt, though, that many have yet to come forward. Each with their own personal reasons for not doing so, yet, or maybe ever.

And then there is the growing list of men to talk about. Some have denied, some have admitted, but none of them have released statements that suggested they genuinely sorry for their perversions. This was made more obvious after reading an actual apology; the one given by Louis C.K. just yesterday. I’m not saying a sincere apology atones for his actions, as he himself concedes in his letter. Just that it’s a good place to start, towards reform, and perhaps offering some redemption for the wronged.

My question though, isn’t about Louis C.K. and whether his apology was sufficiently conciliatory. My question is about whether it would be right for someone in his situation to address other instances where they engaged in sexual misconduct. That is, I feel like if someone is truly sorry for their previous actions, they should want to admit to all of them. Admit they’ve engaged in, not just a single lapse of judgement, but an entire pattern of bad behavior. Because from our perspective, for example, if another woman comes out tomorrow they were sexually assaulted by Louis C.K. he is back to square-one, as people are going to dismiss his apology as ingenuine.

On the other hand… what of the rights of the victimized? As I mentioned above, each person has their own reasons for not thrusting their traumatic experience into the public limelight.

With that in mind, see title. Discuss.

The Donald

A vain man childishly fishing for the adoration of strangers. Being rich isn’t enough; he wants to be universally loved for his imperfections, too. Slurping at the popularity spigot, The Donald’s need for ego gratification is double the size of any ordinary adult. Never in history has such a supercilious dope been more adored. It is beyond reason. Perhaps aware of this, and sensing defection, Trump whips out his phone… 140 characters is all it takes. Tweet.

He glances out the window of his private jet at the destruction beset a once beautiful US island; it disgusts him. He retreats to his phone to check emails, but years of operant conditioning and muscle memory take over. He taps on the bird icon. “30k likes! Only.“. Trump works best knowing his base is in a frothy outrage. “Better do one more…

That’s the one! Mmmmm. That one had everything.

Favorite News Sources Across the Political Aisle

What are the most liberal-leaning and conservative-leaning news outlets?

Sometime last presidential election season I had this very thought. All kinds of dirt was being thrown around about both candidates; however, lots of it was coming from news sources I had never heard of. I probably still wouldn’t have if Twitter and Reddit didn’t exist, providing these outlandish stories a platform for mass exposure (and mass outrage).

So I could never really tell if what I was reading was from a legit source, completely spun, or flat-out fake. For example I would see a headline like:

FBI Arrests Hillary on Corruption Charges

Linking to a news outlet calling themselves “The Discovery Examiner Guardian“, or something. I thought, well… if The DEG is like the NYT, Hil-dawg is probably in deep shit. If the DEG is like Breitbart then I’m 99% sure the opposite is true.

So who the F are these guys? Like, in general.

So I googled: What are the most liberal-leaning and conservative-leaning news outlets? To my dismay I found nothing satisfying. No ranking lists curated by experts, no data driven politio-meter, nothing really. Just a bunch of anecdotes from internet people complaining that so-and-so news is like totally bias.

I guess it makes sense given that any corporation attempting to appear as “the news” is trying to woo as many people as possible into believing they are thee most credible straight-shootin’, just-the-facts-you-decide, fair-and-balanced, no-underlying-agenda organization around. So, as nice as it would be, of course Fox News isn’t going to post on their homepage something like, “We are a 8/10 on the left/right political spectrum“.

So I had an idea… Reddit created this mess; let’s see if they can help fix it.

Using Reddit API (PRAW), I wrote python script to identify the favorite news sources of two subreddit communities on opposite ends of the political aisle.

This bot scraped the url from the top daily submissions to the main pro-Trump and anti-Trump subreddit communities, essentially determining these subreddits favorite news outlets. Nota bene: the validity of these data as a litmus for liberal-leaning and conservative-leaning news rests on the assumption that generally people prefer to post and upvote stories that align-with and support their personal world view.

Without further adieu…

UPPER PANEL: pro-Trump subreddit The_Donald
LOWER PANEL: anti-Trump subreddit EnoughTrumpSpam

I cross posted this project on Reddit’s Data is Beautiful, where a Googler, Filipe Hoffa saw my post and took it to the next level. Using data studio he expanded my original idea to all of reddit, and made it interactive. It’s something really worth playing around with for a few minutes. So go check it out!.

You can grab the code I used from this gist (you really don’t want it though, it’s awful)