assaultpotato

I personally disagree, but I see I'm in the minority on that. Oh well /shrug

A headline can be unfortunately written without it being a grand conspiracy my guy. CBC is pretty good - this headline misses the mark imo as it hides the fact that they were convicted on some counts.

Gotta love how they try to hide the guilty verdict on some counts behind "not guilty of most"

The commodification of our most base needs, such as romantic relationships, is truly troubling. So much unrest because things like food, shelter, and reproduction are paywalled. Makes the population more vulnerable to fascist ideals.

The original image, and your extension, are an emergent behavior as a result of The Algorithm - due to "scarcity", Player B (men) is (are) encouraged to roll the dice as frequently as possible.

This whole dynamic is real, results in negative interactions for both players, and is intentionally set up by the apps to maintain engagement and extract as much money via pay-to-play advantages as possible. Dating apps are rigged to give men and women bad experiences so they (largely men) become desperate enough to pay $25 a month or whatever to have an unfair advantage.

The internet (and other players!) likes to hate the players, not the game, and the only "comfort" many young men have is Tate and Co.

"Some guy" in this case is Trump during the interview with NBC btw - that's exactly his (first) plan

I agree to give them no quarter

/shrug

I don't think the plurality of people agree with your interpretation based on votes (I did not downvote). Perhaps worth examining whether your intent is being understood.

Except when they've publicly flosted the idea of revisiting border treaties the satire becomes outright support.

False dichotomy, my guy - why not call out both the civil rights violations and their basic idiocy? Some people wouldn't be swayed by "the department of education ensures equity in education" but would be by "the illiterate are tearing down education". Just because a single person didn't mention every single thing going wrong every time they comment doesn't mean they don't care about stopping every bad thing.

That is fair.

IBT Media introduced a number of bad practices to the once reputable magazine and mainly focused on clickbait headlines over quality journalism. Its current relationship with IBT Media is unclear, and Newsweek's quality has not returned to its status prior to the 2013 purchase. Many editors have noted that there are several exceptions to this standard, so consensus is to evaluate Newsweek content on a case-by-case basis.

Lines up with the "nothingburger' headline. Probably case-by-case is appropriate. Thanks for showing me that!

For the record I can't comment on this specific article - it may be a nothingburger. I just think Newsweek itself is not inherently problematic.