593
Flame On (lemmy.world)
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Wilzax@lemmy.world 91 points 4 months ago

Is that the crossword company that runs a news themed side hustle?

[-] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Also the book sales reporting people.

[-] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 54 points 4 months ago

They better get a right wing nut to write an op ed on what happened...

[-] IllIIllIllIIIIl@programming.dev 29 points 4 months ago

A facebook screenshot within a Twitter screenshot

[-] Album@lemmy.ca 43 points 4 months ago

A threads screenshot inside a bluesky screenshot?

[-] Rolando@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

It was important to add the commentary "Ouch." The post really made no sense without it. ~/s~

[-] criss_cross@lemmy.world 25 points 4 months ago
[-] Jackcooper@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Needs someone on Tumblr saying how they can't breathe

[-] OopsAllTwix@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 months ago
[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

They know exactly what they're doing. Their editors have decided that American democracy is a "partisan issue" and have decided to cover it as such, meaning they won't "take sides" over it.

https://presswatchers.org/2024/05/new-york-times-editor-joe-kahn-says-defending-democracy-is-a-partisan-act-and-he-wont-do-it/

[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago

For what it’s worth that is still taking a side

[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Well, yeah, I would agree with that. The author also does a good job of pointing out how that's bullshit, and gives several examples of ways that the Times is covering the candidates differently, demonstrating their hypocrisy. (They've been laundering right wing ideas into mainstream public consciousness for decades now, anyway.)

It is still shocking to see the editor just come out and say, in plain English, that the very concept of democracy is a partisan issue, and that they refuse to weigh in on it.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

That deserves its own post.

[-] TurtleJoe@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Go for it. I'm not sure which forum it belongs in.

[-] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 2 points 4 months ago

Good to know it isn't just brain dead social media users who don't understand the difference between neutrally reporting on facts and favoring both parties equally.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Why would they publicly announce to the world that they don't understand how to use a platform that 12 year olds are using?

[-] moon@lemmy.cafe 2 points 4 months ago

What are they referring to with nytimes? That needs to actually be true to be an actual burn.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

They're referring to the Times' editorial position not to refer to trump as a convicted felon, a rapist, a fraud, indicted for crimes against national security, a russion colluder, and many many other things which may harm his electability, should republiQans ever stop being batshit insane.

this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
593 points (96.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5778 readers
765 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS