Why isn’t a guy who makes, embraces, and consults on advertisements an advertiser?
The Stuff removed / changed / pulled relating to Trump
- Thread starter Dwarvenhobble
- Start date
Is he a wrestler too? He was on WWE.
Rich, famous people can do or buy their way into doing a lot of things. That doesn't make them proficient at it. He's not a toy designer any more than he is a professional wrestler,
First, he’s in the WWE Hall of Fame. I would call him a wrestler. Seems reasonable to do. Second, he makes, consults on, and embraces professionally made advertisements. I think calling him an advertiser is also reasonable on that basis. I used to be a cook as a job and I have spent less time making food than he has spent making advertisements. He is an advertiser.
Let's not give him too much credit. He swindled a little bit under 50% of registered voters who bothered to vote, which (IIRC) comes to something like 23% of the nation.
Fair enough. 23% is still too high for that scumbag. Glad he's getting as undignified an exit as humanly possible.
Again anyone can rip videos from social media sites that's not a hack that's just slightly more advanced webfu.
I mean as an experiment once I fed in the stream ID of a Zero Punctuation video into VLC and was able to watch the episode there and I could have (if I were inclined) saved a local copy. (and no it's not just the URL of the page the episode is on, I think this was before the site reboot too)
I doubt more than usual outside of those dealing with Trump directly.
And should it not have been a bit obvious Iraq didn't have WMDs?
So are referees, ring announcers, bookers, trainers, managers, celebrity guests, celebrity hosts, friends and family of wrestlers, camera men, security and probably a lot more.
There are lots of jobs that would put you in wrestling just like there are a number of roles that would put you in advertising. Revnak isn't saying trump's official job title is copywriter or graphic designer but he still worked on and supervised marketing for a number of his brands.
Hey and also by your own admission you know and care nothing about the guy so maybe your opinion means squat.
Just so everyone is caught up on this Tweet. Yes, the Capital riots were definitely organised on Parlor.
A NYT reporter commented on how this tweet was not truthful. Greenwall commented back that he wanted to make sure that Facebook etc didnt get away with having organising happening on their too.
So Greenwall's less than accurate portrayals for a good cause (holding Facebook accountable.) Which sums up a lot of media
Facebook should be held accountable for this, but more notably for the multiple genocidal acts that have occurred due to their utterly insane practices of not hiring moderation staff that speak the languages and know the cultures of the countries they expand into then grant free internet access to where the only website they can use is Facebook. This has happened multiple times in countries with tens of millions to hundreds of millions of people. This has happened in India, the largest liberal democracy in the world, multiple times. Mark Zuckerburg should be tried at The Hague for crimes against humanity and Facebook should not exist.
That being said, fuck Parler for instigating one insurrection in this one country as well.
Evidence?
I have seen others since claim it was organised on facebook too.
Your hypothetical doesn't usefully answer the issue. It's essentially just an argument that X has bigger impact than Y, which is no use against the argument that Y has an impact.
We were asking "why do you need to hold X more accountable than Y?", and X having a bigger impact than Y is the answer.
Especially because you'll be reading Y in context already, where with X, there's no guarantee you'll continue on to read the article.
20% has been too high for any of the scumbag major party candidates for quite awhile.
1. I didn't say nothing was done on Facebook. I was refuting the claim that all organising of the Capital riots was not done on Parlor. Those are two separate issue
2.
Here is Greg Greenwald calling a NYT journalist slimey for 'pretending' that Greenwald meant 'no organsing of the riots happened on Parler.'
3. You're article does the same thing, refutes Facebook's claim. I personally, as far as I've seen think they were all involved.
4. The only way the other media giants were allowed to get away with not being cancelled is becuase they are willing to moderate. Parler unwillingless to moderate at psast potentially riot inciting rheotric cost them
on 4) Parler was willing to moderate. A number of the posts shared about were less than 24 hours old when they were being brought up on other platfoms.
On 3) That's a journalist and an article on my side so far nothing evidence wise on yours.
We were talking about numerous things, as clearly indicated in the words in this thread that anyone has the ability to go back and check. You cannot just pretend they were not discussed.
Yes we were talking about numerous things.
And of those things, you claimed that I had inconsistent standards when it comes to headlines, articles, and speeches.
And my hypothetical showed that those standards were not inconsistent, but based on impact.