"We destroyed an entire generation's future, but now we need a federal standard to make sure all generations are destroyed forever!"
The advertising industry started advertising cigarettes to women as liberty torches around the late 20s, the numbers I saw were 1928/1929. By that time, the 19th amendment giving women the right to vote was almost 10 years old, it was already a safe standpoint on an issue that had been won. As for multiracial couples, miscegenation laws were wiped out in the 1960s and even symbolically the laws that were unenforceable had been struck from the books by 2000, it isn't particularly controversial today either.
Government propaganda is a different beast mind you, and it's scary how quickly they can use their unlimited money to change people's minds on big stuff. Big difference between trying to get you to buy something and still be profitable and taking half your pay and using it to convince you of bullshit...
Government propaganda is a different beast mind you, and it's scary how quickly they can use their unlimited money to change people's minds on big stuff. Big difference between trying to get you to buy something and still be profitable and taking half your pay and using it to convince you of bullshit...
Just imagine. New Yorkers are the most highly taxed people in America, and their tax dollars are going to teaching this.
I guess you reap what you sow...
I guess you reap what you sow...
Terry O'Reilly is an ad man who has continuously run a show on CBC radio for decades, starting with O'Reilly on advertising, followed by age of persuasion, and now under the influence.
I remember listening to his show and he had some episodes that explained 2 things:
1. Advertising is conservative. Not politically conservative, but conservative in that it plays things very safe, and usually is the last one to the party on any given trend. They may have gone all-in on stuff like multiracial families and gay imagery, but only once it seemed like society had already long accepted it.
2. Marketers ended up getting some very strong signals around 2008 that the entire society was turning progressive and they should too. There were a couple of studies that ended up showing first that something like 70% of millennials were progressive, and second that something like 70% of people claimed that they would pay a premium for a brand that is seen as supporting causes, regardless of what those causes were.
So in that sense, the relatively recent failure of wokeness is something they're responding to in record time.
One thing everyone on every side needs to remember is that brands don't give a fuck about your cause. They're just trying to sell their products, and if coopting your thing will help them do that they will, and they'll happily use your cause up like a tissue and toss it away once it's no longer useful.
I remember listening to his show and he had some episodes that explained 2 things:
1. Advertising is conservative. Not politically conservative, but conservative in that it plays things very safe, and usually is the last one to the party on any given trend. They may have gone all-in on stuff like multiracial families and gay imagery, but only once it seemed like society had already long accepted it.
2. Marketers ended up getting some very strong signals around 2008 that the entire society was turning progressive and they should too. There were a couple of studies that ended up showing first that something like 70% of millennials were progressive, and second that something like 70% of people claimed that they would pay a premium for a brand that is seen as supporting causes, regardless of what those causes were.
So in that sense, the relatively recent failure of wokeness is something they're responding to in record time.
One thing everyone on every side needs to remember is that brands don't give a fuck about your cause. They're just trying to sell their products, and if coopting your thing will help them do that they will, and they'll happily use your cause up like a tissue and toss it away once it's no longer useful.
Barb the unbuilder -- can she fix it?
Barb the unbuilder -- drop that zero and getchaself a hero!
Barb the unbuilder -- drop that zero and getchaself a hero!
Interesting linguistic history on bears, the word "bear" isn't even the original word for bear. Its etymology is essentially "the thing we aren't even going to name right now" because people were scared that if you said the name of the thing that you might get a scary bear coming in tearing up your shit. The original name of a bear was closer to the latin ursus or greek word arktos, but it was called "the brown one" as a euphemism. Many northern european cultures made similar euphemisms.
Bears, particularly grizzly bears, are dangerous.
Bears, particularly grizzly bears, are dangerous.
Seems to me that any one of them could be self-serving or selfless.
It's like asking "what color is a car?" -- cars can be lots of colors.
It's like asking "what color is a car?" -- cars can be lots of colors.
I really want to build a little metal widget to melt together the new filament to the old filament to avoid situations like this.
Yeah, exactly. You can say some pretty ruthless words but some intonation and body language can make it perfectly clear you're not trying to be angry or malicious, whereas in text you have to try to express what you're saying, and for example if you were just giving someone a friendly reminder, you can hear someone being friendly but often "just a friendly reminder" comes off either being used in and ironic sense for a not so friendly reminder, or generally just have a little bit more malice to it then the writer likely intended.
It's one reason why sometimes it takes me 3 days to compose an email that I could have done over the phone or in person in 30 seconds, sitting there trying to figure out exactly the best way to express a tone that would just come naturally.
It's one reason why sometimes it takes me 3 days to compose an email that I could have done over the phone or in person in 30 seconds, sitting there trying to figure out exactly the best way to express a tone that would just come naturally.
Unfortunately I don't really have a choice in the matter. I was talking about how things are rather than how things should be.
Also, first of all we don't know that it is done against their will, and second of all we don't know just how bad whatever they would use the data's treatment against might be. Nobody wants a limb amputated, but sometimes that's just the treatment for a certain disease.
Also, first of all we don't know that it is done against their will, and second of all we don't know just how bad whatever they would use the data's treatment against might be. Nobody wants a limb amputated, but sometimes that's just the treatment for a certain disease.
I ended up reading up about it a few years back while doing research for a post on the fediverse, and I was pretty surprised at it as well. The thing is, sometimes it is the only option, but it's the sort of thing that you do after years and years of trying every other thing.
At this point it should just be assumed they're always out to get you and steal everything you have and if you can live in a FOSS ecosystem you should.
I wonder if zoomers or gen alpha know who that is?
It'd be kind of weird considering the guy as I think dead of old age now.
It'd be kind of weird considering the guy as I think dead of old age now.
The immense amount of corruption that we are getting to see clear as day because the establishment thinks that everyone is on their side and so agrees with what they're doing is incredible.
Obviously we kind of have to take Trump's word on the threat to imprison his son, but given what we've already seen why wouldn't we? 6 months of releasing violent riders back into the streets for one side of the political spectrum, and apparently Donald Trump ends up getting every single one of the indictments that should have belonged to the rioters slung right at him. Magically somehow law and order matters when it's a hated political opponent.
As for a fake dossier, we now know that the Steele dossier was fabricated for the purposes of trying to mess up the election, so if they would probably develop a fake dossier for one trump, why wouldn't they do the same thing for another?
Obviously we kind of have to take Trump's word on the threat to imprison his son, but given what we've already seen why wouldn't we? 6 months of releasing violent riders back into the streets for one side of the political spectrum, and apparently Donald Trump ends up getting every single one of the indictments that should have belonged to the rioters slung right at him. Magically somehow law and order matters when it's a hated political opponent.
As for a fake dossier, we now know that the Steele dossier was fabricated for the purposes of trying to mess up the election, so if they would probably develop a fake dossier for one trump, why wouldn't they do the same thing for another?
Why would they have a parade for june 19th nowhere near June 19th? Is this really what he's saying it is?
The only thing that's really notable is that he realizes what the wind is blowing like outside of the room he happens to be in at the moment. There aren't a lot of people in the Hollywood or Washington bubble who find themselves outside of the room they're in often since it's a really nice room.