Entertainment dressed as news, channel.

Which gives superficial comfort as it gives scant protection from how aggregate data is used to upend democracy.

Wonder if the BBC will describe the much higher number of daily murders in Gaza as waves of executions?

“Chinese authorities have far-reaching access rights to personal data within the sphere of influence of Chinese companies,” she added.

And that’s different to American companies how? None of this climate of data harvesting is currently good for us.

What is it with racist settler colonists that they love their triumphalist parades so much? Are they just bad people?

So the title should say that right wing and centrist sources are less factual than left wing ones.

That’s uh…what she said?

Henrys here! Almost…

I could swear I heard that whole ACER laptop angle a couple of months ago on someone else’s podcast. I don’t want to say verbatim but I was having severe dejayvu. It wasn’t a Doctorow podcast that much I’m sure.

Extra points for not lifting the spagetti pile when you’re hovering.

That reads like exactly how republicans describe democrats. Can you not see how far to the right you have strayed?

One sure thing about that shitstain Trump is that he is bribable. He will pivot on a pinhead if it would enrich him more.

The deeper reason is that they believe in a highly hierarachical society in which they have earned the right to be in the top strata. That’s why they chase the big donors. That’s why their calculations will always put themselves and their grip on power above: the basic needs of impoverished Americans; or the lives of innocent civilians getting bombed out of existance; or future generations that will inherit our strung out eco system; and about countless other maladies and evils that beset our tettering civilisation.

They are not leftwing, they are the corporate bulwark against leftwing ideas. They are not big tent, they promulgate a very narrow reading of reality to the benefit of their paymasters.

I think this is a bit naive. Both partys will have done their homework and have a fairly good idea what it is those disenfranchised voters want. The problem is is what they want is at odds with what the party’s big donors want.

100%

At the time maybe, but a lot of smaller details such as this will become much more important later on when the dust settles. So, why not write it up now so that ot can be revisited later on. It’s not as if there’s a limit to the number of acticles they can publish.

Well if all you are used to is your establishment talking heads in narrow lockstep then it might be off putting. It isn’t at all damning for a single outlet to report on something. Especially when working somewhere so dangerous to be.

In reality this is, as others seem to be at pains to point out, a minor addition to the mountian of nightsoil. It wouldn’t make a lot of sense to fabricate such a lightweight appendix if it is likely to undermine reporting on more serious events.

Calling it branding isn’t entirely out of scope with the normal usage of the word either. It just is slightly problematic in that we are now conditioned to expect the very worst of humanity from some of the IDF soldiers so our minds expect hot irons.

Writing the number on their foreheads is flat out dehumanising. How is that in any way contentious?

If your local police force rounded up all the males in a minority group and wrote the processing numbers on their foreheads do you think it might make the news?