Ocean

I don’t think anyone in these comment sections is in decision-making circles lol. Though I am in agreement that limiting access to social media for minors would probably be a good thing. I think that could be done by removing the profit incentive from corporations to target young audiences. Like stricter laws/bans against advertising to minors

Right, so shouldn’t parents be responsible for that and not the government?

Companies make a little money selling your information. It is better to assume that any information you hand over to a private entity will be sold. It doesn’t matter if they say that it isn’t going to be at that time. Should they ever fold your information goes to the first bidder.

True, and I was just using racism as an example. I guess I also could have just said people regularly vote against their own best interests due to lack of understanding the long-term effects.

Many people, and this isn’t just exclusive to the U.S., aren’t racist, but their policy stances have racist outcomes. For instance, people fear crime or the loss or destruction of their property, so almost universally people vote for more policing, despite the lack of evidence that your suburban police department with military equipment makes you any safer.

He literally does photo ops tearing down homeless encampments. If you don’t have an issue with that, then I guess he is your guy. Yes, there are quite literally worse people, but that doesn’t mean he doesn’t suck.

How does a few elites creating a censored comedy festival for attendees, who can only attend the event because of the financial position they’re only in because of the Royal family, create a more progressive Saudi society?

So you really think that they’re going to allow those comedians to perform without having a once-over of their material? Also, isn’t the Saudi government already known for censoring Western media?

When did I say it’s okay? I just said this is nothing new, it’s not an anomaly. You should be outraged, but don’t act like a for-profit company isn’t going to chase profit incentives, and if they are incentivized to sensationalize, they’re going to sensationalize. If they end up making more money from an outright lie after any litigation, they’ll tell a lie.

It’s all good, I thought we were just yapping

​ Unlike a professor who would reject a student’s unsubstantiated claims, a for-profit entity won’t care about evidence unless its absence hurts profits. And you can say that about nearly any commercial news or journalistic organization. Establishing an equitable and high standard of education is the only true way to combat this, and that’s not happening in our lifetime

I guess, but inflammatory and sensationalist headlines have always existed.

If said reporter can’t present quantifiable data/evidence, then maybe they shouldn’t write the article?