Having someone else fuck your girl really seems like a great way to help your self esteem issues
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
(Image removed from quote.)
Bret Stephens’ article was ridiculous, eugenicist garbage. But calls to boycott the newspaper won’t help
Sadly, the morning the column debuted, Twitter commentary lurched from biting and witty takedowns of Stephens to calls to “boycott” the New York Times over the foolishness of one of dozens of contributors to but one section of a massive multimedia news and entertainment company. (Disclosure: I occasionally write op-eds for the Times.)Although the harsh criticism of Stephens and the Times was completely warranted, in other respects the response – especially the calls for boycott – was misguided. Such posing not only simulates real political action, it displaces it, satiating one’s need to feel like one has done something. This is an example of a non-boycott boycott, narcissistic stunts we have seen emerge with targets like Starbucks and Facebook in recent years.Before anyone says “What about South Africa?” or “What about the lunch counters during the civil rights movement?”, yes, specific, targeted, organized boycotts that generate real financial harm and demand serious sacrifice or risk by participants can effect change. But none of that is happening with these hashtag eruptions.Potentially effective boycotts are focused, local, disciplined, and have specific, articulated goals and demands. They must bring public shame and measurable financial harm to a firm. A few people tweeting “I’m going to stop subscribing to the Times because of Bret Stephens” does not rise to the level of successful social movements or tactics.If one believes, in the absence of evidence, that a few dozen Twitter users canceling subscriptions to the New York Times would affect decisions at the Times, one does not understand the incentives embedded in the attention economy. The Times, like most other globally available web publications (including Breitbart and any number of white supremacist sites), benefits from umbrage as much as applause.Futility aside, to threaten to withhold revenue to any respectable news publication at this moment in history is hard to justify. We need quality journalism, expensive investigations, and bright commentary more than ever. The Times, for all its flaws, overwhelmingly delivers all of these things. The Times has serious lapses in judgment and reporting – like any publication, including The Guardian – but we should not wish for a day when The New York Times does not exist.A fake boycott of the Times would be meaningless at best, counterproductive at worst. What can we do about the Bret Stephens problem, then? The only reasonable and potentially effective response is to push at what the leaders of the Times care about as much as their revenue: their reputation for seriousness and responsibility. Shaming the Times works better than threatening the Times.
long man bad is a pretty silly argument to make, already seeing people outing themselves as mental midgets, that being said, not a chance on earth im watching this video, not interested in the slightest
bih needs to be slapped anytime he starts talking foreign policy
you do fall back on disinterest for purposes of avoidance, not that I find it bothersome or something to hold against you
Quote from: OnlyRegret on January 02, 2020, 04:29:03 PMyou do fall back on disinterest for purposes of avoidance, not that I find it bothersome or something to hold against youWell it's not topical, depends on who replies to me, I find a bunch of people on here not worth engaging with so I wont, I'd talk at length with others. If we're talking about contrapoints, someone in here linked me to them for the first time and I died laughing at what was put forth as a coherent 'counterpoint', havent been interested since, never will be again, i do however despise the 'long man bad' argument as it doesnt go beyond 'i dont have time for this therefor it sux'.
Quote from: Momo on January 02, 2020, 05:13:31 PMQuote from: OnlyRegret on January 02, 2020, 04:29:03 PMyou do fall back on disinterest for purposes of avoidance, not that I find it bothersome or something to hold against youWell it's not topical, depends on who replies to me, I find a bunch of people on here not worth engaging with so I wont, I'd talk at length with others. If we're talking about contrapoints, someone in here linked me to them for the first time and I died laughing at what was put forth as a coherent 'counterpoint', havent been interested since, never will be again, i do however despise the 'long man bad' argument as it doesnt go beyond 'i dont have time for this therefor it sux'. contrapoints makes some good arguments, if you can get past all the cringe whimsy, which I personally cannot, but it's kind of weird to dismiss her on that basis. Don't you follow that boxxy lookalike? She is way more of a surface level thinker than contra
not sure how this has escalated to disagreeing with each other's opinions, about the worst place a conversation can go
Quote from: Momo on January 03, 2020, 02:20:36 AMnot sure how this has escalated to disagreeing with each other's opinions, about the worst place a conversation can goI just wanted to shit on the boxxy lookalike and her dumb boyfriend
https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1212962834457468929
