Well yeah, some people cannot handle their opinions being challenged, but you are also guilty of insisting on a hardline that seems unlikely to be the only explanation. If media companies are looking to axe people, it makes perfect sense they would pick someone who is not growing while also deplatforming someone who speaks against their ideals. So Colbert lost almost 1/4 of viewership over 5 years, but how does that compare to Kimmel or Fallon viewership? Without a baseline for comparison, your statistics are just arbitrary. The Times even said that ad revenue is about half for all Late Night shows compared to 2018, but if there are also half as many shows, then the profit/loss should be similar.

Overall, I don’t believe anyone would cancel a show that still draws over 1mill viewers for “financial reasons”. Redo the budget, sure, but not cut the entire program.

Edit: well written and reasoned though. The comment was a good conversation contribution. It’s unfortunate downvotes always represent agree/disagree instead of productive/counterproductive.

It’s amazing how important the /s is, lol. I got you.

Their comments always bare and bear great wisdom.

Local results are the only thing I have left to judge by. It has been a loosing battle for a long time, and they “patched” some of the last true communication and outreach available to indiviuals wanting to communicate nationally and worldwide. (The whole Twitter jounalist crackdown a while back comes to mind)

Everyone is getting too tired to put in effort for upholding values, but my stance is opposite that, I’m way more stubborn than people realize. I’m in the right place, and changed some things for the better at work. Might be time to switch my energy to my community. I want to transition from their Sysiphus to their fuckass-boulder.

The last step is finding out how to pit mega funding against eachother in a way that ultimately benefits locals.

Nono, see. They want to lock in repeat visits and gain them as an investor, then use their influence to suckle cash out of the remaining populace.

The only saving grace will be if they code in trying to fill a plane for efficiency. I could see an AI making last minute flights at an actual discount but only if full flight efficiency is prioritized over individual sale margin, so not likely. It’s aloft on an wing and a prayer.

About the same time that all 4 other airlines decide to do the same or worse.

Yeah, advertisers and corporate interests has already brought ruin to for profit news. I expect the passionate people will always exist and keep doing what they think is right. The cohesion will crumble before their spirit. Might be time to push local gov to help more with funding public stations.

I’ve finally found you, Adam Homonym, and find you lacking. You should consider Act don’t Preach supplements to become less hollow. 💜

Cheers to that. Question for you. With no funding being allocated, do you think this will be the final break of any remaining influence the federal gov has over public radio? I don’t know how much there was to begin with, but I imagine it is similar to infrastructure funding that came with stipulations.

Oh, I hope that didn’t come across as a trap question, sorry if it did. I don’t know the exact right answer myself.

I guess my thoughts on the “too hard” statement comes from the feeling of fighting for every inch I can get against the hyper-sucessful businesses creating the gross system I’m forced to be in. People’s basic needs are not taken care of and mental health is in crisis. I find it hard to justify judging people based on anything other than how they handle directly interacting with something or someone. After all, I buy local as much as reasonably possible and have reduced the meat consuption for my family, but sometimes I’m just exhausted and get a burger because I’ve been craving one all week. Those in power need to enforce moral imperatives on others in power before I focus on individuals.

I am glad to read that last part. Not enough small changes are celebrated and encouragement goes so much further than criticism. Especially when it’s in such short supply.

Uhh, Mostly because the graph already shows lamb and mutton to be half the impact as beef.

Genuinely, thank you for sharing. That’s an interesting takeaway and a little different than mine. What do you think matters more the ethics of destroying/replacing the system vs the ethics of negatively affecting/interfereing with those in the system? Example: Would it be ethical to kill/euthanize all the cows in a cramped feedlot along with whoever is in charge so it wouldn’t happen again?

I predict goat and sheep cheese is better than cow cheese in emissions, but is it about the same 10:1 ratio for output?

deleted by creator

Ok, sure. Tangentally related, have you seen the ending to the show The Good Place?

Ty. I guess OP could be hinting at that. I don’t pick up on hints very well, and thought they were saying the news should also report about vehicle accident and death rates sometime.

I mean, how many times have we seen news reports of people intentially driving into protesters? I do wish they had the leading cause of death for comparison tho. Probably cancer, looks like a low-estimate is 6000 people a year just in Chicago.

Are you saying that OP is making a “cheap false equivalence”? They are commenting on news coverage, so I don’t follow what you mean.

That doesn’t make the comparison invalid, it can just be misleading to those with poor data literacy. Knowing how many “preventable” deaths from each source is valuable, but only if people are planning to do something about it.