The New York Times Magazine took a look at how Chuck Klosterman was doing as their new Ethicist through his first five columns, and so far people are having a hard time with agreeing with him.
Klosterman has a reputation for taking the strangest side of an argument sometimes, so some were intrigued when he was named the new Ethicist columnist for the New York Times Magazine in June. In his first five appearances he answered questions about pesky relatives, sick significant others, cheating, and chicken-murdering dogs.
According to the Times' data, the three questions that commenters disagreed with most were his answer advising against stealing someone's cat to give it medical treatment, his answer advising a girl to not break up with her super sick boyfriend, and his answer advising someone to confront their friend who perpetually cheats on tests but not report him to the school. 23 percent agreed with his advise to not steal the cat. Stealing a cat is a crime, even if it is sick and needs attention. He gave the writer points for compassion, even. But only 11 percent agreed the girl should stay with her sick boyfriend, and only 13 percent agreed with his answer about the cheater. The girl said she was having doubts about their long term future before he was diagnosed, so we can understand where the dissent comes from there. His answer to the friend of the cheater operated within the idea that the writer wasn't going to report his friend, because the writer said in his letter that he wouldn't.
Those three answers all came within Klosterman's first three weeks on the job, but according to their overall numbers people aren't agreeing with him at all. On average, only 33 percent of people agree with Klosterman's answers.
This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.org.