It’s more honest, and a retvrn to its original name. Time to drop the pretense. antelope-popcorn

  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    7 days ago

    Libs are so worked up about this name change.

    A Chris Hayes post where he’s troubled by a NYT headline - https://bsky.app/profile/chrislhayes.bsky.social/post/3ly2d2fyxik2w

    A reply

    Because this is what press under authoritarianism is like. Wait until they cut off broadcasting licenses and start censoring access to the internet. Srsly look at Russia, China, etc. we know what they will do if we allow it. So plan for the worst (pirate radio!) and fight to hold the line.

      • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        ·
        7 days ago

        I was wondering if libs know that they can speak directly to people from Russia and China and ask them about their country, what things are actually like, why are they different than the US, etc. They’re not hard to find these countries have huge populatios. But then I also realized it wouldn’t matter.

          • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            6 days ago

            Blacks and Browns are too savage to consider having dialogue with

            It always irks me when people pontificate endlessly about how bad China is for Africa, entirely forgetting that’s a relationship different African nations CHOSE for themselves, unlike the monstrous bombings and government interventions by US or French governments without the consent of the peoples of those nations. I always try and steer the conversation back to that if they respect people from African nations as people, then those people have made this choice themselves; we don’t want others doing the thinking for us, and equally they don’t want others doing the thinking for them either.

            • coolusername [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              6 days ago

              Burkina Faso is modernizing incredibly rapidly with the help of China. Also you need to inform them that the west overthrows or assassinates African leaders that don’t sell out their people to western corporations. China does not.

              • Evilsandwichman [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 days ago

                Looking back at my post my choice of words may indicate I think China is bad for Africa; it wasn’t the intent; I absolutely recognize how good China’s relationship with different nations has been. I’m reminded of something a lady in Zambia once said that the VP once went over there, landing in an airport built by China, driven on roads built by China, to give a speech in a venue built by China, about why Africa shouldn’t work with China.

                Cooperating with America or really any Western country is just waiting for the knife to stab you in the back; China is not a risky partner in the slightest, and on the contrary has been a phenomenal partner. I recall something I once read about railroads built in Africa; the railroads built by European powers go straight to ports (for wealth extraction), while railroads built in Africa are designed to benefit the nations in Africa.

        • Grapho@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          7 days ago

          They can’t, they’re all bots except for the ones on Reddit threads with thousands of upvotes saying “I hate my country and I think the US should nuke and invade us and the State Department is telling the entire truth”

        • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          7 days ago

          I don’t see what’s wrong with that headline. It seems like a pretty straightforward telling of the facts. Isn’t that what a headline is supposed to be? Is it a lie or something I don’t get? It doesn’t seem to be implying anything good or bad about the name change, so I don’t get the problem.

          • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            7 days ago

            That is the headline.

            Who’s on first?

            -–

            In all seriousness - I don’t know what Hayes expected. It’s not as if the NYT and other American media outlets became garbage yesterday. The media has published one pro-Trump article after another for years. A huge number of powerful people in the media loves Trump.

            • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              7 days ago

              no i just mean how else are they supposed to say it? like i can’t imagine a more neutral or evenhanded way to put it

              • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                7 days ago

                Liberals don’t want evenhanded. They badly want the Times to be theirs and the headline to be a pontification of liberal belief with praise of the shining City on Hill crap. I know that’s impossible. There’s no space for that in a headline! But Trump has made the libs insane.

                I don’t even know what’s in the article. It might even have tepid criticism.

                • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 days ago

                  oh i get it now. they can’t stand reading one sentence that isn’t about the dang cheeto in the white house. well put comrade

                  • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    7 days ago

                    If the NYT wanted to they could’ve written…

                    BREAKING NEWS: In an unprecedented move Trump renames DoD to Department of War

                    I wonder if that would have mollified the libs. My hunch is mostly - maybe? They’d fixate on the exact wording but Hayes would have only gotten - I dunno - ~20% as many likes. In any case - it’s surreal to hear the libs whining and moaning about this as if it was equivalent to Trump’s extra-judicial executions of 11 people on the open ocean that was not only illegal but in addition he was too fucking lazy to create even a laughable legal justification before he did it. He just did it. And that seems pretty ominous.

              • SevenSkalls [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                7 days ago

                This is my question. I can’t think of how else to express that headline. It’s pretty straightforward.

                Is the idea that the headline should say something about how this is bad?