![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
gestures to everything
gestures to everything
I wish they could figure out a better strategy than making people hate them.
First they were “accused” and now “critics warn”.
FFS corporate news, stop being awful. Is the bill comparable to project 2025? Then say that.
Yeah, again, science confirms what we knew years ago.
I’m not mad at you, science. It’s your sister Media I’m disappointed in.
Where’s that interview??
Checkmate!
It was a thing
Yes but you have to go back to the 80’s and make this meme for every year. We’ve known about it since then.
It’s so weird watching corporate news fish around for an angle when there isn’t one yet.
Weird and wrong.
Low-energy. SAD!
What’s going on, UK? Suddenly I’m seeing good news happening??
Carmina Burana begins
The orange rapist is looking a little pale. And old. And gross. And stupid.
He appears to be having a, uh, episode. Or something.
It’s a gumbo of cheatin’!
Pussy hats are back, dawg
On May 19, 1992, during a crucial part of the presidential campaign, Vice President Dan Quayle delivered a speech on family values that came to define him nearly as much as his famous “potato” gaffe. During the speech, he criticized Murphy Brown a fictional 40-something, divorced news anchor on a popular situation comedy for her choice to have a child outside of marriage. Quayle argued: “Bearing babies irresponsibly is simply wrong.
Same Shit Different Decade
A notebook is offline. That’s perfect.
Some things were great. Some things were not.
Nothing’s usually falsified, per se, it’s more that pollsters have a range of questions and results and one of them is going to “suit” a news agency. Or a PR group, or whatever organization needs the “power of polling results” to move clicks.
For example, we’re in Prime Polling Season, with a huge election coming up, so the polling results are all going to be in the same neighborhood, question-wise, usually. It’s better for corporate news if the race is very close, so all the polls we’ll read about are going to say that.
If a poll came back heavily - lopsidedly - for one candidate over the other, we likely wouldn’t hear about it. Because that would be a problem. They can’t dig into the poll too much they just need a headline out of it.
This is all outside of the methodological problems with polls, it’s just specific to the “uses” that corporate news requires of polls.