4064

I don’t want to speak for Timex, but I think his point was that the tweet mischaracterizes the article.

4065

Sure, except the stuff she put in her tweet is a direct quote from her article. Where she frames it as dueling speeches specifically.

I agree that most of the article isn’t framed that way, which makes it all more of a disservice to put that kind of thing in. And lead off with it. Back in the day, it seems like this is the sort of thing an editor would excise but in the modern era, it’s probably the editors encouraging it. I mean, it got us all “engaged” and talking about the article.

Yeah, it does sort of, but it’s a direct quote from the article. And the part of the article that she chose to pull out and lead with. So if it’s mischaracterization, she’s intentionally mischaracterizing her article in that manner.

4066

Which is ultimately the only purpose. The goal of informing is so passe.

4067

Yeah, but then I read the actual article in the Post. It doesn’t really seem like the article itself is presenting some kind of competition.

I think the term “dueling speeches” is talking about how Zelenskyy’s speech was universally well received, and necessitated something of a reactive response from Biden. And that both speeches were pretty important, key things that happened that day.

And her analysis seems pretty accurate based on what I saw. I didn’t read it as though the article was trying to create some sense of competition.

4068

image

4069

Aw man, I miss Big Mouth. That show is way better than it had any right to be.

4070

What the fuck has happened to Newsweek?

Just so you know before you click, this opinion piece was written by Donald Trump, Jr.

4071

New ownership, from what I vaguely recall.

4072

Doesn’t look like this is a recent development.

And honestly does anyone under about 80 still read or think this is a news source and not instead what the two links below say it is, either a zombie corp and/or owned by a Christian cult.

This sums up Newsweek these days:

Newsweek’s opinion section, which has become a clearinghouse for right-wing nonsense. But it also points to a larger crisis in journalism itself: The rise of the zombie publication, whose former legitimacy is used to launder extreme and conspiratorial ideas.

4073

Hey, someone backported buying a large FB group and switching the topic to a scam to trad media!

4074

For all the tolerance and enlightenment that modern society claims, Americans are losing hold of a fundamental right as citizens of a free country: the right to speak their minds and voice their opinions in public without fear of being shamed or shunned.

Absurd misrepresentation of the 1st Amendment by some of the most influential and highest paid writers in the country.

4075

My free articles are done and I won’t throw a dime to those guys, but the quoted bit is quite the derptastic take on “rights” and it aligns perfectly with how I imagine their editorial board thinks.

4076

The “right to speak without fear of being shunned” is especially wild – they’re saying that ignoring somebody is a fundamental violation of free speech.

4077

‘To shun’ is very different than ‘to ignore’. They are not synonymous.

4078

There isn’t a constitutional right not to be shamed or shunned for your speech. Rather the opposite, since another expression for shaming is ‘free speech’, and another expression for shunning is ‘freedom of association’.

4079

But they both have the following in common: neither are relevant with regards to the 1st amendment.

4080

My right to shun someone is constitutionally protected.

4081

It’s not even about the first amendment. Not being shamed or shunned isn’t part of free speech in any context.

4082

We may have a small problem with civics education here in the ol’ US of A.

4083

Not really. What we have a is a reality problem with people who say awful things but are deluding themselves into thinking that everyone agrees with them. These people used to be shunned by all the major political parties, so few people heard them, but they are now mainstream, elected Republicans who have some power.