Maybe just doesn't come up in conversation?
We've had loads of political discussions at work the last month or so - more than in the previous 10 years combined I think.
No-one ever says where they get their facts or figures from when we're talking.
however, some of these facts and figures have been clearly culled from AAV / Canary / etcDitto.
this is what's happening. No-one includes a citation when having a convo with a mate at work.It could be that some people are getting stuff from these sources and just not mentioning it I s'pose. Which would be more worrying still.
however, some of these facts and figures have been clearly culled from AAV / Canary / etc
Politics rarely comes up IRL conversations IME.
It's only really discussed online, thankfully
I'm not sure it's necessarily 'worrying' chilango . Not everything that is posted by these sites is bad - as has been mentioned AAV is pretty good, and generally the worst thing about the Canary articles are the misleading headlines rather than the content being especially inaccurate (most of the time anyway). Isn't it better people are getting their info from these sites than the Daily Mail? Personally I hope that we're still in the birth pangs of this new media and some of these sites will grow up to be more reliable and useful.
I'd like that too, but workplaces and communities just don't work like that anymore (on the whole - there are some notable exceptions). Most of the growth of left-wing political activity has been spread and organised through online networks IME.I want a left that's popular and populist and rooted in communities and workplaces. A concrete left built up from the base with it's media reflecting this.
Ah, capitalist leeches. Just what left-wing discourse needs more of.the establishment of new left sites by existing media players who want a slice of the audience.
I didn't say it was necessarily an entirely positive development! And yes, The Canary's business model is awful and perhaps that's the main reason why it still stands out as the worst of these sites. Its flaws are part of its very design.Ah, capitalist leeches. Just what left-wing discourse needs more of.
I'd love to see this suggested following the money trend end up with the laurie penny lot writing for the canary.
I don't think all of it is actively harmful. Some of it is, yes. And yeah, I have noticed some people on Facebook who alternate the Canary with the most awful right wing American shit.This is shit that is actively harmful though, the commentariat stuff is just annoying and a bit middle class.
3 and half grand a months, 42 grand a year - plus what she gets paid for doing the writing that these people pay for her to do. Crumbs. Match that canary.Penny aint going to be doing it, have you seen her patreon?
Is it just me, or has she largely disappeared lately? If producing content for her private subscribers keeps her away from the rest of us, then all the better...3 and half grand a months, 42 grand a year - plus what she gets paid for doing the writing that these people pay for her to do. Crumbs. Match that canary.
Is it just me, or has she largely disappeared lately? If producing content for her private subscribers keeps her away from the rest of us, then all the better...
she continues to tweet, but I've not seen much else from her for ages.She popped up to defend that person who was banging on about being better than B&Q staff and everyone who doesn't know who Tim Farron is.
Is she even producing content for these private subscribers? I don't think she is, I think she's just being paid to be her.
Iirc she was on with one of the Sunday morning tosspots and all.Question Time and Start the Week? Hmm.