It may help in one way, though. By giving money away to conservatives it will create a conflict of interest. As more money goes into their pockets these same conservatives now have a reason to stay away from the fake conspiracy talk somewhat. At least a little bit, since having some of the controversy blowing around seems to benefit these folks.
For all the good reasons not to use Facebook, some folks seem to go to a lot of trouble to make up false reasons.
They should have known the real money to be made is setting up a fake football team to get money from the university's alumni and boosters. Wonder what the mascot is for the University of Entrapment, probably an angler fish?
I do not understand your comment about "Google wants to act like it's a bastion of progressive values." I am not personally aware of an instance in which Google has tried to push progressive values. I know that there are google employees who have tried to do so, but The Google itself has always struct me as being a rather rapacious, amoral capitalistic machine. Do you have anything to back your claim?
I am still trying to get over the idea that anyone in Arizona would flip their vote based on an article in the NY Times. The former sheriff is not exactly a mystery candidate for the electorate in his home state.
All those people who celebrated the Citizens United decision that says corporations have first amendment rights are probably fighting tooth and nail against these initiatives to curtail how big tech expresses themselves.
Oh wait....
Unfortunately, it is something worse. The tenure system is completely broken. It is nice that a couple high ranking people have the freedom to take a stance, the vast majority of academics do not have that freedom. The tenure system is supposedly in place to preserve freedom of academics, but in reality the system ensures that those trying to make it to full professor have no recourse to take part in a merry-go-round of publishing small incremental advances in journals ran by unscrupulous and rapacious publishers.
The party's National Committees cannot be trusted any more than the broadcast networks. Giving the party's the ability to decide the format and people will only give them even more power to push their preferences forward. The problem is not that the debate formats are dreadful, the problem is the debates themselves.
The notion of a debate to test and expose a candidate is outdated since shortly after the Lincoln-Douglass debates. Given the easy ability to communicate and share information there is no need for a debate. The problem is with a system that rewards candidate who do not provide information and more details. Instead we get soundbites and empty spectacle.
We need something better than the current first past the post system that will allow for a variety of candidates and will reward them for being more open to the electorate.
The party that says government interference stifles innovation and hinder business wants to shift a huge burden on to business.
The Summer Olympics will be next year. If this trend holds through next year then it will be a huge problem for local television. NBC has been pushing its streaming coverage in hockey, cycling, and the Olympics. If they can get a boost for their sports app then it will be a big knock against ESPN. Sports has a big impact on television viewing, and it will be interesting to see how this will shift the media influence in sports.
No matter what Mr Carmody decides to do Sgt. Obidi will be protected and will likely face few consequences. Even if taxpayers have to foot the bill there will be little in the way of a disincentive for any of the wrong-doers to change their ways.
So when someone has to pay taxes it is the evil government taking the money. When the government wants to steal your information then all of a sudden it is "society" protecting itself.
Cut to a scene with Gromit working on the project with Wallace and reading the book, "Principle Component Analysis For Dogs."
Sounds like the real issue here is that children are human beings that have rights.
Some news organizations still have not figured out the difference between sharing a different point of view and an outright lie. It will probably take a generation before media organizations get over the idea that they are there to simply repeat the lies from two different partisans.
This is going to destroy FOX news. Do the means justify the ends?
Looks like everyone thinks they can repeat CBS's success with Star Trek: Discovery. Unfortunately, it will likely be a short bandwagon.
"...vulgar terms that play no real part in the expression of ideas."
Fuck that noise. Apparently Justice Alito thinks it is okay for the government to decide which parts of a person's speech matter in the idea they are expressing. His self professed method of taking a practical approach does not seem consistent with the idea that the courts should be in the business of editing out the minor details of a person's speech as long as the original idea remains.
If someone (me) is running a website and does not want to use google adwords or some other pack of creeps, what are the other options?
Listening to Senator Rubio dictating who should be allowed to use the courts as a weapon is like allowing Cornelius Vanderbilt decide what transportation options people should be allowed to use.
Spartacus!
I am Devin Nunes' Cow