yarr

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

YES

get off my lawn

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Sorry, we had to deny your application because you're Asian. Try another school.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Exactly!!! They don't care about social causes, etc. They just want the most clicks on their clickbait headlines. Simple as. If there was some crazy twist to the migrant story, like Hunter Biden being on board or something it would have dominated the headlines. The main sin of the migrants was not being clickbaity enough.

 

RANT AHEAD:

Quite a few times now, I've seen the complaint that "the news refuses to cover the story about the migrants' sinking ship and focuses on the billionaires instead".

This strikes me as totally unsurprising. 99% of all news sites are given by gathering clicks and eyeballs. The Titan story has it all:

  • Billionaires
  • Zany CEO with submarine with oddly sourced parts
  • Tie in to one of the most famous shipwrecks of all time
  • A story that's technically easy to understand (the sub went underwater and was lost, you don't need a degree in advanced physics to appreciate this)
  • Some drama because they might have been underwater without oxygen vs. instantly dead due to decompression
  • The possibility of an exciting sea rescue

vs the migrants' story

  • No one famous or of note on board
  • This is by far NOT the first vessel lost in this manner
  • No exciting twists

I'm sorry, but if I headed up a news room OF COURSE you will run the first story. It's simply more exciting. This is NOT an example of class war or a personal vendetta against the poor.

If you are one of those who think the migrants story should be more closely followed why don't YOU lead a discussion about it, volunteer your money and/or time to organizations that support migrants, etc.

It's also a really boring complaint to see, because nearly ALL of the major news outlets DID cover the story, but guess what, it is far less engaging, so it gets less attention overall.

Don't blame the news for what stories get big -- blame the public and their fascination with these stories. The news outlets are only putting out what their audience wants to see.

Feel free to start a site that talks only about migration issues, but I think you'll find it way harder to make money vs talking about clickbait.

 

RANT AHEAD:

Quite a few times now, I've seen the complaint that "the news refuses to cover the story about the migrants' sinking ship and focuses on the billionaires instead".

This strikes me as totally unsurprising. 99% of all news sites are given by gathering clicks and eyeballs. The Titan story has it all:

  • Billionaires
  • Zany CEO with submarine with oddly sourced parts
  • Tie in to one of the most famous shipwrecks of all time
  • A story that's technically easy to understand (the sub went underwater and was lost, you don't need a degree in advanced physics to appreciate this)
  • Some drama because they might have been underwater without oxygen vs. instantly dead due to decompression
  • The possibility of an exciting sea rescue

vs the migrants' story

  • No one famous or of note on board
  • This is by far NOT the first vessel lost in this manner
  • No exciting twists

I'm sorry, but if I headed up a news room OF COURSE you will run the first story. It's simply more exciting. This is NOT an example of class war or a personal vendetta against the poor.

If you are one of those who think the migrants story should be more closely followed why don't YOU lead a discussion about it, volunteer your money and/or time to organizations that support migrants, etc.

It's also a really boring complaint to see, because nearly ALL of the major news outlets DID cover the story, but guess what, it is far less engaging, so it gets less attention overall.

Don't blame the news for what stories get big -- blame the public and their fascination with these stories. The news outlets are only putting out what their audience wants to see.

Feel free to start a site that talks only about migration issues, but I think you'll find it way harder to make money vs talking about clickbait.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

Why WOULDN'T we move off if something better came along?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

a lot of white men with similar records

There are some democrats that are male progressives that have a law background that ran for president that are not hated by people? Who?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris have in common

I would posit those three agree with each other far more than they disagree with each other. It would be odd to find someone that objects philosophically to only one in that set. From where I sit they have a lot of similarities:

  • Party Affiliation: All three women are Democrats.
  • Experience in Public Service: Clinton, Warren, and Harris have held significant roles in public service. Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, as well as a U.S. Senator for New York. Elizabeth Warren is a U.S. Senator for Massachusetts. Kamala Harris is the Vice President under President Joe Biden, and prior to that, she was a U.S. Senator for California and the Attorney General of California.
  • Women's Rights Advocacy: Each of these women has been an advocate for women's rights. Clinton has a long history of advocating for women's rights both domestically and internationally. Warren has focused on issues such as equal pay for equal work. Harris has a record of fighting for women's health rights and equal opportunities in the workplace.
  • Law Background: All three women have backgrounds in law. Clinton is a Yale Law graduate who worked as an attorney before her political career. Warren was a law professor for more than 30 years, and Harris was a prosecutor and served as the Attorney General of California.
  • Presidential Candidates: All three have run for president. Clinton was the Democratic nominee in 2016, Warren was a primary candidate in the 2020 election, and Harris was also a primary candidate in the 2020 election before eventually becoming the vice-presidential candidate.
  • Progressive Policies: They all have advocated for progressive policies such as healthcare reform, climate change mitigation, and wealth inequality reduction. Clinton championed healthcare reform as early as the 1990s, Warren has been a vocal critic of Wall Street and a proponent of wealth redistribution, and Harris has put forth plans addressing healthcare access and climate change.
[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

This is the real question. I'm sick of people dismissing criticisms against her because she's black and/or a woman. Give me an actual reason to like her!

She's definitely a horrible public speaker. I totally disagree with how she tackled truancy during her time as a DA/AG. Is this just my internalized racism speaking or can I ACTUALLY feel this way?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I don't like her because of situations like her truancy laws. If you think she's not liked just because of her race and/or gender, then you'll never understand why people don't agree with her.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

I’m not a big fan of the Republican party but there are some issues they are championing at the moment like free speech

Free speech like this?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

This is so lazy. The burden of proof is upon the claimant. Feel free to toss out wild claims without providing anything to support what you are saying, but then don't be surprised when no one believes you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hillary Clinton was widely respected every year

(source needed)

Here's a list of objectionable stuff Hillary was involved with prior to running for president:

  • Hillary Clinton's hawkish stance on war, being more hawkish than Barack Obama and Joe Biden. She is specifically noted for advocating an escalation in Afghanistan​.
  • Clinton's involvement in the 2009 military coup in Honduras. Rather than condemning the coup, Clinton pressured other countries to recognize the new right-wing government, leading to increased violence and instability in the country​​.
  • The firing of seven employees from the travel office during the Clinton administration in 1993, an act that some critics attribute to Hillary Clinton's influence. The fired employees were later reinstated due to public pressure​.
  • Controversies surrounding her commodity trades from 1978 and 1979, in which she turned an initial investment of $1,000 into nearly $100,000. No official investigations were carried out, but the incident raised eyebrows and led to criticism​​.
  • Involvement in her husband's controversial pardons during his presidency, including those for the owners of a carnival company convicted of bank fraud​.
  • A controversy regarding gifts taken from the White House upon the Clintons' departure in 2001. Some items, worth $28,000, were meant for the White House estate and not as personal gifts for the Clintons. These items were returned after complaints from the donors​.
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

For me, it's this:

[Harris] fought for this law, which raised the financial penalty and made it a criminal misdemeanor for parents, up to a year in jail, when their children missed at least 10 percent of school time.

https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2020/10/17/924766186/the-story-behind-kamala-harriss-truancy-program

view more: next ›